Judgment :- The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the Insurance Company against the Judgment and Decree made in MACT.OP No.317 of 2001 dated 09.04.2003 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Principal Sub-Judge) at Tindivanam. 2. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:- The claimant was injured in a motor accident on 09.07.2000 at about 7.30 p.m. The claimant was standing near Vinayagapuram Bus Stop near Teachers Colony at Lakshmipuram, Chennai for the purpose of going to Kotturpuram. At that time, a TVS-Suzuki motorcycle bearing Registration No.TN 05 B 8384 came from the northern side at high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the claimant. Due to the accident, the claimant sustained severe injuries on the left leg and injuries all over the body. The claimant claimed a compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- before the Tribunal. The vehicle was insured with the appellant / Insurance Company who resisted the claim. On the pleadings, the following issues were framed by the Tribunal:- a) Whether the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the motorcyclist or not? b) Whether the claimant is entitled for any compensation? If so, what is the amount and from whom? After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal was of the view that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the motorcyclist and awarded a compensation of Rs.8,90,000/-with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition. Aggrieved by the award, the Insurance Company has filed the present appeal. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submitted that the Tribunal is wrong in holding that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the motorcyclist. It is also submitted that the award of the Tribunal is excessive and exorbitant, without basis and justification, and that therefore, the order passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law and the same has to be set aside. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the first respondent / claimant submitted that the Tribunal had considered all the relevant materials and evidence and came to the correct conclusion and awarded a just, fair and reasonable compensation. Hence the order of the Tribunal is in accordance with law. 5. Heard the counsel. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the first respondent / claimant submitted that the Tribunal had considered all the relevant materials and evidence and came to the correct conclusion and awarded a just, fair and reasonable compensation. Hence the order of the Tribunal is in accordance with law. 5. Heard the counsel. On the side of the claimant, witnesses P.W.1 and P.W.2 were examined and documents Ex.P1 to Ex.P25 were marked. On the side of the Insurance Company, no witnesses were examined and only one document was marked as Ex.R1, which is the copy of Insurance Policy. P.W.1 is the claimant. P.W.2 is the Doctor. Ex.P1 is the copy of First Information Report. Ex.P2 is the copy of Motor Vehicle Inspectors Report. Ex.P3 is the sketch. Ex.P4 is the judgment copy of the Tiruvottriyur Court. Ex.P5, Ex.P6, Ex.P7 and Ex.P8 are the medical prescriptions given by Appollo Hospital with regard to treatment. Ex.P9 is the note with regard to the treatment taken by the claimant at the Ramachandra Clinic. Ex.P10 is the note with regard to the treatment taken by the claimant at the JIPMER Hospital. X-rays are marked as Ex.P11. Medical bills with regard to the treatment taken at Appollo Hospital are marked as Ex.P12, Ex.P13 and Ex.P14. Bills with regard to taxi expenses to go to the hospitals were marked as Ex.P15. Medical bills are marked as Ex.P16. Expenses towards professional fees given to the Doctors, were marked as Ex.P17. Notes with regard to the expenses for the treatment taken at the Ramachandra Hospital are marked as Ex.P18. Note with regard to the expenses incurred in the K.H.Nursing Home is marked as Ex.P19. Various bills with regard to treatments taken by the claimant are marked as Ex.P20. Ex.P21 is the salary certificate given by Tagore Educational Society. Ex.P22 is the proof for having worked in the Government Department. Ex.P23 is the Disability Certificate. Ex.P24 and Ex.P25 are the x-rays. After considering the above oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the motorcyclist and awarded a compensation of Rs.8,90,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition. Ex.P23 is the Disability Certificate. Ex.P24 and Ex.P25 are the x-rays. After considering the above oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the motorcyclist and awarded a compensation of Rs.8,90,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition. The details of the compensation are as under:- Rupees Loss of income during the treatment period 50,000/- Transport expenses 5,000/-Extra nourishment 20,000/-Medical expenses 2,20,000/- Attender charges 5,000/-Pain and suffering 1,50,000/- Permanent disability 4,00,000/-Loss of future earning 40,000/- 8,90,000/-============== The complaint was given against the motorcyclist for his rash and negligent driving and he was charge sheeted in Crime No.41/01. Ex.P1 is the First Information Report. Ex.P2 is the Motor Vehicle Inspectors Report, wherein it is stated that the vehicle was not suffered from any mechanical defect. Ex.P3 is the sketch. After considering these evidence, the Tribunal had given a categorical finding that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the motorcyclist. 6. The age of the claimant was 59 years at the time of accident. He was working in the Revenue Department and retired. After retirement he was working in the Tagore Educational Society, Adyar, Chennai and was earning Rs.10,000/- per month. The nature of injuries sustained by the claimant are as under:- "Grievous injuries sustained on leg and hand and injuries on all over the body, both legs, left wrist, fracture on left leg, right hand." After the accident, he took treatment in the Appollo Hospital and also a thick rod was fixed in his left leg. He took from 09.07.2000 to 212. 2000, i.e., for a period of six months. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.50,000/-towards loss of income during the treatment period. Even though it was stated that the claimant took treatment for 6 months and he was earning Rs.10,000/-per month, there is no proper evidence filed to substantiate the same. Hence it would be appropriate and reasonable to reduce the amount awarded towards loss of income during the treatment period from Rs.50,000/-to Rs.20,000/-. Accordingly, the amount awarded towards loss of income during the treatment period is reduced to Rs.20,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards transport expenses, Rs.20,000/-towards extra nourishment and Rs.5,000/- towards attender charges, which are very reasonable and hence they are confirmed. Accordingly, the amount awarded towards loss of income during the treatment period is reduced to Rs.20,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards transport expenses, Rs.20,000/-towards extra nourishment and Rs.5,000/- towards attender charges, which are very reasonable and hence they are confirmed. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.2,20,000/- towards medical expenses. Relying on Ex.P12, Ex.P13, Ex.P14 and Ex.P20, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.2,20,000/- towards medical expenses. It is an actual expenditure and hence the same is confirmed. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- towards pain and suffering which is excessive. After taking into consideration of the injuries as stated above, it would be appropriate and reasonable to reduce the sum of Rs.1,50,000/-awarded towards pain and suffering to Rs.1,00,000/-. Accordingly, the amount awarded towards pain and suffering at Rs.1,50,000/- is reduced to Rs.1,00,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.4,00,000/-towards permanent disability, which is very excessive. After taking into consideration of the disability and also his occupation as a Manager, I feel that it would be appropriate and reasonable to reduce the amount awarded towards permanent disability from Rs.4,00,000/- to Rs.1,50,000/-. Accordingly, the amount awarded towards permanent disability at Rs.4,00,000/-is reduced to Rs.1,50,000/-. The Tribunal has also awarded a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of future earning. No documentary evidence produced by the claimant to show that he is continuing in the occupation. Hence the amount awarded towards loss of future earning at Rs.40,000/- is set aside. The details of the modified compensation are as under:- Rupees Loss of income during the treatment period 20,000/- Transport expenses 5,000/- Extra nourishment 20,000/- Medical expenses 2,20,000/- Attender charges 5,000/- Pain and suffering 1,00,000/- Permanent disability 1,50,000/- 5,20,000/-============== Therefore, the claimant is entitled to the modified compensation of Rs.5,20,000/-as against the compensation of Rs.8,90,000/-awarded by the Tribunal. The interest rate awarded by the Tribunal at 9% p.a. from the date of petition is confirmed as the same was the prevailing rate at that time. 7. It is stated that the Insurance Company has already deposited 50% of the award amount, i.e., Rs.4,45,000/- as per the order of this Court dated 210. 2005. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit Rs.75,000/-with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 2005. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit Rs.75,000/-with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On making such deposit, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the same. 8. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of with the above modification. No costs.