Judgment :- 1. The appeal is preferred by the Transport Corporation-appellant against award dated 08.07.2004 made in MCOP No.919 of 2001 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Principal Sub Judge), Salem. 2. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows: On 26.06.2001 at about 5.30 p.m., while the respondent/claimant, who was a B.Com student of A.V.S. Science College, Salem along with his friends Mohan, Karthikeyan and Shan Nihar was standing at Salem to Attur Main Road, Ramalingapuram Bus Stop, a bus bearing registration No.TN-45-N-1317 belonging to the appellant-Transport Corporation driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the claimant, due to which, the claimant had sustained grievous injuries. The claimant was immediately admitted in Sri Palaniyandi Mudaliar Memorial Hospital, Salem, as inpatient. He claimed a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- as compensation. The appellant-Transport Corporation resisted the claim. On pleadings the Tribunal framed the following issues:- "1.Whether the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver or not? 2. What is the compensation the claimant is entitled to? If so, what is the amount and from whom?" After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal held that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the appellant-Transport Corporation and awarded a compensation of Rs.3,06,343/-with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition and the details of the same are as under:- Loss of earning capacity Rs. 1,44,000/- Medical expenses Rs. 1,49,543/- Pain and suffering and mental agony Rs. 6,000/- Extra nourishment ` Rs. 6,000/- Damage to the cloths Rs. 200/- Transport charges Rs. 600/-Total... Rs. 3,06,343/- Aggrieved by that award, the Transport Corporation has filed the present appeal. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Transport Corporation questioned only quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and contended that the amount awarded by the Tribunal is excessive, exorbitant, without basis and justification and that therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law and the same has to be set aside. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/claimant submitted that the Tribunal had considered all the relevant materials and evidence on record and came to the right conclusion and awarded a just, fair and reasonable compensation. Hence the order of the Tribunal is in accordance with law and the same has to be confirmed. 5. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/claimant submitted that the Tribunal had considered all the relevant materials and evidence on record and came to the right conclusion and awarded a just, fair and reasonable compensation. Hence the order of the Tribunal is in accordance with law and the same has to be confirmed. 5. Heard the counsel. On the side of the claimant, P.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and documents Exs.P1 to P13 were marked. On the side of the appellant-Transport Corporation RW1 was examined and no document was marked in support of their claim. P.W.1 is the claimant. PW2 is Doctor Pugazhenthi. PW3 is Doctor Nedunthuraikko. Ex.P1 is the certified copy of the First Information Report. Ex.P2 is the certified copy of the wound certificate. Ex.P3 is the certified copy of the Motor Vehicles Inspector Report. Ex.P4 is the original discharge summary. Ex.P5 is the original scan report. Ex.P6 is the certified copy of the charge sheet. Ex.P7 series are the original medical receipts. Ex.P8 is the original receipt issued by the hospital. Ex.P9 series are the original medical bills and doctors recommendation receipts. Ex.P10 is the original scan film. Ex.P11 is the x-ray. Ex.P12 is the disability certifiate. Ex.P13 is the x-ray. RW1 one P.Selvaraj is the driver of the bus. After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal had given a categorical finding that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus and the finding is based on valid materials and evidence. 6. At the time of accident, the claimant was aged about 20 years. He was a III year B.Com student of A.V.S. Science College, Salem. He deposed that while the claimant and his friends Mohan, Karthikeyan and Shan Nihar were standing at Ramalingapuram Bus Stop, Salem to Attur Main Road, a bus bearing registration No.TN-45-N-1317 belonging to the appellant-Transport Corporation driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the claimant, due to which, the claimant had sustained grievous injuries. Immediately he was admitted in Sri Palaniyandi Mudaliar Memorial Hospital, Salem, as in-patient and took treatment from 26.06.2001 to 23.07.2001 and on 03.07.2001 a surgery was conducted. PW.2, who is a Neuro surgeon, has examined the claimant and gave treatment to him and Ex.P4 is the discharge summary. Immediately he was admitted in Sri Palaniyandi Mudaliar Memorial Hospital, Salem, as in-patient and took treatment from 26.06.2001 to 23.07.2001 and on 03.07.2001 a surgery was conducted. PW.2, who is a Neuro surgeon, has examined the claimant and gave treatment to him and Ex.P4 is the discharge summary. PW3 Doctor Nedunthuraikko, who examined the claimant on 16.06.2004, has given Ex.P12 disability certificate to the extent of 40%. Ex.P13 is the x-ray. According to the Doctor, there is severe damage to the right thigh to extent of 1c.m and also damage to the hip joint. He deposed that in Ex.P13-X-ray, he saw three screws were fixed on his right thigh and the claimant cannot walk, run and sit for a long time. The Tribunal without giving any reasons, reduced the disability from 40% to 30%. Following Section 163-A and schedule II of the Motor Vehicles Act, the Tribunal has fixed the annual income of the claimant at Rs.30,000/-and applied multiplier of 16 and arrived at a sum of Rs.4,80,000/-(Rs.30,000 x 16). As stated above, the Tribunal has taken into account 30% ability and the loss of income due to disability works out to Rs.1,44,000/- (Rs.4,80,000/- x 30/100). The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport Corporation submitted that the Tribunal ought not to have adopted the multiplier method for arriving the loss of income and the Tribunal should have fixed Rs.1000/- for 1% disability and should have awarded only a sum of Rs.30,000/-for 30% disability. Normally, the Courts award Rs.1,000/- to Rs.2,000/- per percentage of disability. The Tribunal has reduced the percentage of disability from 40% to 30% without any reason. Considering the evidence of Doctors PWs.2 and 3 and Exs.P11 and P12 disability certificates, it would be appropriate to fix the disability at 40% and award Rs.2000/- for 1% disability. Thus, the loss of earning due to disability would be Rs.80,000/-(2000x40) as against the award amount of Rs.1,44,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,49,543/- towards medical bills. There is no dispute regarding the same. It is an actual expenditure incurred by the claimant during his treatment. Hence, considering Exs.P7 series, P8 and P9 series, the amount awarded by the Tribunal under this head is very reasonable and the same is confirmed. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.6,000/- towards pain and suffering and mental agony, which I feel is very low. It is an actual expenditure incurred by the claimant during his treatment. Hence, considering Exs.P7 series, P8 and P9 series, the amount awarded by the Tribunal under this head is very reasonable and the same is confirmed. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.6,000/- towards pain and suffering and mental agony, which I feel is very low. Considering the nature of injury suffered, I feel that it would be very reasonable to award Rs.10,000/- under this head as against Rs.6,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.6,000/-towards extra nourishment, which I feel is very low and the same is modified to Rs.7,500/-. The Tribunal has awarded only a sum of Rs.200/- towards damage to the clothes, which I feel is very low and the same is modified to Rs.500/-. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.600/- towards transport charges. It is clear from the evidence and Ex.P8 medical receipt that the claimant took treatment from 26.06.2001 to 23.07.2001. Considering the above, it would be very reasonable and appropriate to award a sum of Rs.5000/-towards transport charges as against Rs.600/-. The details of the modified compensation as per the above discussion are as under:- Loss of earning capacity Rs. 80,000/- Medical expenses Rs. 1,49,543/- Pain and suffering and mental agony Rs.10,000/- Extra nourishment ` Rs. 7,500/- Damage to the cloths Rs. 500/- Transport charges Rs. 5,000/- Total... Rs. 2,52,543/- Therefore, the claimant is entitled to the modified compensation of Rs.2,52,543/-as against the compensation of Rs.3,06,343/-awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has fixed the rate of interest at 9% p.a from the date of petition, which I feel is very high. The accident has occurred on 26.06.2001. During the said period, the prevailing rate of interest is at 7.5%. Hence, the rate of interest is modified to 7.5% instead of 9%. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport Corporation has submitted that already entire award amount has been deposited as per order of this Court dated 07.03.2005. The claimant is permitted to withdraw the modified award amount of Rs.2,52,543/- with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition after adjusting the amount already withdrawn. The appellant-Transport Corporation is also permitted to withdraw the balance amount on making proper application. 8. With the above modification, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of. No costs.