Judgment :- Being aggrieved by the award of compensation of Rs.90,000/- for the personal injuries sustained by the Claimant, State Transport Corporation (STC) has preferred this appeal. 2. Brief facts which are necessary for disposal of this Appeal are as follows:- On 01.09.1998 – 7.15 hours when the Claimant was standing in the mud portion of the road on Panruti to Cuddalore Main Road near Varakkalpattu Ayanarkoil, the Appellant-Corporation bus bearing registration No.TN-32 N 0093 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the Claimant. Due to the accident the Claimant had sustained fracture injury in the left hand 5th metacarbal bone and multiplier injuries all over the body. After the accident, the Claimant was admitted in Government Head Quarters Hospital, Cuddalore and had taken treatment as inpatient. Alleging that the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver, the Claimant has filed claim Petition claiming compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-. 3. Resisting the Claim and denying the negligent driving of STC bus driver, STC has filed counter stating that while the bus was nearing Varakkalpattu Iyyanar koil temple, a private bus was parked infront of the temple on the left side. After sounding horn, STC bus driver tried to overtake R.K.R. bus. At that time the Claimant without minding STC bus and without observing the traffic rules and regulations suddenly crossed the road infront of the private bus and in that course hit on the left side body of STC bus and the Claimant himself invited the accident. Since, STC bus driver was not responsible for the accident, STC is not liable to pay any compensation. 4. Before the Tribunal the injured-Claimant examined himself as P.W.1. Dr.Raju was examined as P.W.2. Exs.P.1 to P.8 were marked. On the side of STC, the driver of the bus was examined as R.W.1. Upon consideration of oral and documentary evidence, Tribunal held that the accident was due to the negligent driving of the bus driver. On the evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 and based upon Ex.P.5 Disability Certificate, Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.90,000/- under the following heads:- Grievous injuries ...... Rs.25,000/- Pain and Suffering ...... Rs. 5,000/- Extra nourishment ...... Rs. 5,000/- Permanent Disability ...... Rs.55,000/- Total ...... Rs.90,000/- 5. On the evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 and based upon Ex.P.5 Disability Certificate, Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.90,000/- under the following heads:- Grievous injuries ...... Rs.25,000/- Pain and Suffering ...... Rs. 5,000/- Extra nourishment ...... Rs. 5,000/- Permanent Disability ...... Rs.55,000/- Total ...... Rs.90,000/- 5. It is not necessary to narrate the entire facts in detail as to how the accident had occurred, who is responsible for the accident and who is liable to pay the compensation, it is for the reason the Tribunal has recorded the findings in favour of the Claimant. Further, these findings are not under challenge. Only the quantum of compensation is in dispute. 6. In the road traffic accident on 01.09.1998, the Claimant had sustained multiple abrasions in the left hand, knee and cheek. He has sustained laceration in the left elbow and multiple abrasions in the left hand and fingers. After the accident the Claimant had taken treatment in Cuddalore Government Hospital as in-patient from 01.09.1998 to 09.09.1998. Since the fracture was not healed, later he had taken treatment in a private hospital. X-ray discloses fracture of 5th metatarsal bone and even after the treatment, the same was not united. 7. At the time of accident, the Claimant was aged 24 years and he was doing construction work. P.W.1 has stated that because of the injuries in the left hand, he is not in a position to handle iron rods in the construction work and carry on his normal avocations. P.W.1 has further stated that because of Permanent Disability, his marriage prospects was also affected. 8. P.W.2 Dr. S.K.I. Raju had examined the Claimant and noticed that the Claimant was pain and swelling in the left hand. The movement of wrist joint was restricted with pain. The hand grip of left hand is powerless. X-ray being taken and it was noticed that old fracture of 5th M.T. bone with mal-union. P.W.2 has stated that with disabled left hand, it would be difficult to pursue his job viz., construction work. P.W.2 has assessed the Permanent Disability at 25%. 9. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.25,000/-for grievous injuries. That apart, the Tribunal also awarded Rs.55,000/- for Permanent Disability. Awarding of compensation for grievous injuries as well as for Permanent Disability appears to be awarding of double compensation. The Claimant could be awarded compensation only under one head either for grievous injuries or for Permanent Disability. 9. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.25,000/-for grievous injuries. That apart, the Tribunal also awarded Rs.55,000/- for Permanent Disability. Awarding of compensation for grievous injuries as well as for Permanent Disability appears to be awarding of double compensation. The Claimant could be awarded compensation only under one head either for grievous injuries or for Permanent Disability. While so, the Tribunal was not right in awarding compensation under both heads. The compensation amount of Rs.25,000/- ordered under the head grievous injuries is disallowed. For Permanent Disability, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.55,000/-. Since, Permanent Disability is only 25%, for Permanent Disability and Loss of Amenities, compensation amount of Rs.50,000/- is awarded. For Pain and Suffering, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.5,000/-. Having regard to the nature of injuries and duration of treatment, the same is enhanced to Rs.10,000/-. The total compensation of Rs.90,000/-awarded by the Tribunal is reduced to Rs.65,000/- ( Pain and Suffering Rs.10,000/-; Extra nourishment Rs.5,000/-and Permanent Disability and Loss of Amenities Rs.50,000/-). 10. The Tribunal has awarded the compensation payable with interest at the rate of 12% p.a., which is reduced to 9% p.a. from the date of Petition as per the decision of the Supreme Court in 2001(1) Supreme Today 5 (Kaushnuma Begum & Others v. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.). 11. In the result, " The compensation amount of Rs.90,000/-awarded by the Tribunal in M.C.O.P.No.132 of 1999 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cuddalore dated 110. 2001 is reduced to Rs.65,000/- and this C.M.A. is partly allowed. " The compensation amount of Rs.65,000/-is payable with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of Petition till the date of realisation. " The Claimant is entitled to withdraw the amount along with accrued interest at the rate of 9% p.a. as per the Judgment in this Appeal on filing necessary Application before the Tribunal. " The excess amount lying in the credit of M.C.O.P.No.132 of 1999 along with accrued interest shall be refunded to the Appellant-Corporation on necessary application. There is no order as to costs in this Appeal.