Judgment :- By consent, the appeal itself is taken up for final disposal. 2. The appeal is preferred by the Transport Corporation-appellant against the Judgment and award made in M.C.O.P.No.316/2003 dated 27.04.2005 by the Motor Accidents claims Tribunal (Fast Track Court No.III), Namakkal. 3. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows: On 25.06.2001 at about 7.00 a.m., the injured/claimant was a passenger in a bus belonging to the appellant/Transport Corporation bearing Registration No.TN-28/R-0487. When the said bus was proceeding from Namakkal to Trichy main road, near Valavanthi Village limit, the driver of the bus driven the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the tamarind tree and caused the accident. Due to the same, the claimant had sustained grievous injuries all over the body. He claimed a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- 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.1,13,500/-with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition and the details of the same are as under:- Loss of income due to disability at 15% Rs. 91,900/- Pain and suffering Rs. 10,000/- Medical expenses Rs. 6,600/- Extra nourishment as well as Transportation charges Rs. 5,000/- Total... Rs. 1,13,500/-Aggrieved by that award, the Transport Corporation has filed the present appeal. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Transport Corporation questioned only the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and contended that the amount awarded by the Tribunal is excessive, exorbitant, without basis and justification. He further, contended that the Tribunal ought not to have adopted the multiplier method for computing the compensation for loss of income due to disability. Therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law and the same has to be set aside. 5. He further, contended that the Tribunal ought not to have adopted the multiplier method for computing the compensation for loss of income due to disability. Therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law and the same has to be set aside. 5. 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. 6. Heard the counsel. The Claimant himself was examined as P.W.1. P.W.2 is one Dr.S. Kadhiravan. On the side of the claimant, P.W.1 & P.W.2 were examined and documents Exs.P1 to P7 were marked. Ex.P.1 is the First Information Report. Ex.P.2 is the motor vehicle Inspectors report. Ex.P.3 is the wound certificate. Ex.P.4 is the Doctors bill. Ex.P.5 is the discharge summary. Ex.P.6 is the disability certificate. Ex.P.7 is the X-ray. On the side of the appellant-Transport Corporation one Mr. Maharajan, driver of the bus was examined as R.W.1 and no document was marked to support their claim. 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. 7. At the time of accident, the claimant was aged about 32 years. He owned a work shop, namely Kumar bike works, Raja street, Erumaipatty, Namakkal and was earning a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month. Due to the accident, he sustained fracture in his left leg, left hand shoulder and left colon bone and injury all over the body. The driver of the bus was charge sheeted for offences under sections 279, 337, 338 & 304(A) of IPC in Cr.No.195/2001 on the file of the Erumaipatti Police Station. Immediately after the accident, he was admitted as inpatient at Sri Nidhi Hospital, Namakkal for 10 days. P.W.2-Doctor who examined the claimant has deposed in his evidence that due to the accident, the claimant is unable to sit, stand and very often suffering from back pain and unable to do any work as before. He further stated that the injury sustained also affects earning capacity. P.W.2-Doctor who examined the claimant has deposed in his evidence that due to the accident, the claimant is unable to sit, stand and very often suffering from back pain and unable to do any work as before. He further stated that the injury sustained also affects earning capacity. Ex.P.3 is the wound certificate and Ex.P.6 is the disability certificate. According to these exhibits, the claimant suffered one grievous injury and four simple injuries. Further, the claimant is earning a sum of Rs.5,000/-per month, but there is no proper evidence to prove the same. Hence, the Tribunal considered monthly income of the claimant at Rs.3,000/- and determined the annual income at Rs.36,000/-(3000 x 12). Since the age of the claimant was at 32 years, the Tribunal adopted multiplier of 17 and determined the loss of income as follows; Rs.36,000 x 17 x 15/100 = Rs.91,900/- The learned counsel for the appellant/Transport Corporation contended that the Tribunal ought not to have adopted the multiplier method in arriving the compensation under the head of loss of income in the case of injury. Normally the Courts used to award Rs.1000/- to 2000/- for each percentage of disability. In this case, it is reasonable to award a sum of Rs.2,000/- for each percentage of disability. Accordingly, for 15% of disability, the loss of income is calculated as follows; Rs.2,000 x 15 = Rs.30,000/- Therefore, Rs.30,000/- is hereby awarded as against Rs.91,900/- awarded by the Tribunal under the head of loss of income. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/-towards pain and suffering. After considering the nature of injury sustained by the claimant, it is reasonable to award Rs.10,000/-towards pain and suffering and the same is hereby confirmed. Further, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.6,600/- towards medical expenses. Ex.P.4 is the medical bills, which is the actual medical expenditure incurred. Hence, the amount awarded under this head is reasonable and the same is hereby confirmed. The learned counsel appearing for the claimant submitted that after taking treatment in the hospital as inpatient, he has taken rest and has also not attended any work during the period of three months. After taking into consideration of the said facts, the Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards loss of income during the treatment period. Therefore, it is reasonable to award a sum of Rs.4,400/-towards loss of income during treatment period. After taking into consideration of the said facts, the Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards loss of income during the treatment period. Therefore, it is reasonable to award a sum of Rs.4,400/-towards loss of income during treatment period. Further, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/-towards extra nourishment and transport expenses, which is reasonable and the same is hereby confirmed. The Tribunal awarded the interest rate at 9%, which is reasonable and the same is hereby confirmed. The details of the modified compensation as per the above discussion are as under:- Loss of income due to disability 15% Rs.30,000/- Pain and suffering Rs.10,000/- Medical expenses Rs. 6,600/- Extra nourishment as well as Transportation charges Rs. 5,000/- Loss of income during treatment period Rs. 4,400/- Total... Rs.56,000/- Therefore, the claimant is entitled to the modified compensation of Rs.56,000/-with interest at 9% from the date of petition. 8. 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. The claimant is permitted to withdraw the modified award amount of Rs.56,000/-with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition, after adjusting the amount, if any, already withdrawn. The appellant-Transport Corporation is also permitted to withdraw the balance amount on making proper application. 9. With the above modification, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.