Judgment :- The appeal is preferred by the claimant against the Decree and Judgment dated 19.06.2006, made in MCOP.No.5406 of 2004 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (II Court of Small Causes) of Madras. 2. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows: The claimant/injured was met with an traffic accident on 110. 2004 at about 15.20 hours. The said claimant/injured was driving his own auto rickshaw bearing Registration No.TN 05 8874 at Narayaguru Salai from North to South Direction. At the time a Bus bearing Registration No.TN 01 N 2546 belonging to the respondent - Transport Corporation was on its trip from K.K.Nagar to Vallalar Nagar. The said bus came in a rash and negligent manner from South to North direction and dashed against the auto rickshaw. Due to the same, the claimant sustained grievous injuries. The claimant claimed a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation. The respondent-Transport Corporation resisted the same. On pleadings the Tribunal framed the following issues:- 1. Whether the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligence of the driver of the Bus belonging to the respondent-transport corporation or not? 2. Whether the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligence of the driver of the auto- rickshaw or not? 3. Whether the claimant is entitled to any claim? If so, how much?" 3. After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.77,440/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition and the details of the same are as under:- Medical expenses Rs. 32,432/- Pain and sufferings Rs. 10,000/- Permanent disability & Loss of earnings Rs. 35,000/- Total Rs. 77,432/- Rounded off -Rs.77,440/- Aggrieved by that Award, the claimant has filed the present appeal for enhancement. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the claimant-appellant submitted that the amount awarded by the Tribunal is very low and meagre and the Tribunal ought to have awarded the compensation as claimed by the claimant and that the amount awarded under various heads is very low and the Tribunal has not followed the Principles of Assessment before passing the Award. He further submitted that the amount awarded by the Tribunal is very low and meagre and seeks to enhance the compensation. 5. He further submitted that the amount awarded by the Tribunal is very low and meagre and seeks to enhance the compensation. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent/transport corporation 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. On the side of the claimant, PWs1 to 3 were examined and the documents Ex.A.1 to Ex.P.10 were marked. The claimant himself was examined as PW1. Thiru.Sivaraman, Head Constable, who investigated the case, was examined as PW2. Dr.Saichandran was examined as PW3. Ex.P.1 and Ex.P.2 are the Discharge Summaries. Ex.P.3 is the series of Medical Bills. Ex.P.4 is the Receipt for future medical expenditure, Ex.P.5 is the Xerox copy of the Driving License, Ex.P.6 is the First Information Report, Ex.P.7 is the Rough Sketch, Ex.P.8 is the xerox copy of the Charge sheet, Ex.P.9 is the Disability Certificate and Ex.P.10 is the X-ray. On behalf of the respondent, Thiru.Elango, who drove the vehicle, was examined as RW1 and no documents were marked to substantiate their claim. After considering the above 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 belonging to the respondent -Transport Corporation. The finding is based on valid materials and evidence and the same is confirmed. 7. At the time of the accident, the claimant was aged about 45 years. He was an auto driver and he was earning of Rs.200/-per day. The claimant in his evidence deposed that due to the accident, he had suffered fracture of right femur, fracture of patella with dislocation and also multiple injuries all over the body. After the said accident, immediately he was taken to the Government Hospital, Chennai and he was treated as inpatient. Later on, he was admitted in the Saint Isabels Hospital, Chennai. He had taken treatment for a period of twelve days. In the said hospital, he underwent surgery and plate was implanted in his right femur and also had taken treatment as out patient. Ex.P.1, the discharge summary given by the Government Hospital, Chennai, corroborated the same. Later on, he was admitted in the Saint Isabels Hospital, Chennai. He had taken treatment for a period of twelve days. In the said hospital, he underwent surgery and plate was implanted in his right femur and also had taken treatment as out patient. Ex.P.1, the discharge summary given by the Government Hospital, Chennai, corroborated the same. Ex.P.2 is the discharge summary given by the Saint Isabels hospital, Chennai, in which, it is stated that there was a fracture of right femur and fracture of patella with dislocation. PW3 is the Doctor, who is an Orthopaedic Surgeon, and in his evidence he has stated that the claimant suffered the following injuries. (1) Fracture of Right Femur (2) Fracture of Patella with dislocation and (3) Grievous Injuries all over the body He assessed the disability to the extent of 50% and issued Ex.P.9-Disability Certificate. After considering the above oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal fixed the disability at 35% without any reason. The learned counsel appearing for the claimant submitted that the Doctor has given evidence that there is disability of 50% and the same has been accepted by the Tribunal. After considering the oral and documentary evidence the disability of 50% is given by the doctor which has to be accepted. The Tribunal only awarded a sum of Rs.35,000/-towards disability. The Award amount is very low. Considering the fact that the claimant was an auto driver, the disability will certainly affect his avocation. Normally the Courts award Rs.1000/- to Rs.2000/-per percentage of disability. Hence, I feel that it would be appropriate to award Rs.2,000/-for 1% disability. After considering the facts and circumstances of this case, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards 50% of disability (Rs.2,000X50%), Loss of Income due to the disability of 50% is modified to Rs.1,00,000/- as against Rs.35,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Further, the claimant claimed that the Loss of Income during the period of treatment. The date of accident is 110. 2004. After the accident, he was admitted in the Government Hospital, Chennai and took treatment upto 110. 2004, thereafter, he was admitted in the Saint Isabels Hospital from 110. 2004 to 210. 2004. So, he was in the hospital for a period of 12 days and also after the surgery in the Saint Isabels Hospital, he was taking rest as advised by the Doctor for a period of two months. 2004, thereafter, he was admitted in the Saint Isabels Hospital from 110. 2004 to 210. 2004. So, he was in the hospital for a period of 12 days and also after the surgery in the Saint Isabels Hospital, he was taking rest as advised by the Doctor for a period of two months. Taking into consideration the same, the reasonable amount is Rs.7,500/- towards Loss of Income during the treatment period. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/-for pain and sufferings. After taking into consideration of nature of the injuries as stated above, it is reasonable and the same is confirmed. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.32,432/- towards Medical Expenses based on relevant materials. Ex.P.3 is the Medical Bills and Ex.P.11 is the X-Ray. On taking into consideration, the Tribunal correctly awarded a sum of Rs.32,432/-, which is an actual expenditure and reasonable and therefore, the same is confirmed. 8. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards Transport, Extra Nourishment and Attendant Charges. The claimant was taking treatment in the Government Hospital, Chennai as well as in the Saint Isabels Hospital and his right leg was fractured, it will certainly affect his avocation of driver. Considering the same, it would be appropriate to award a sum of Rs.5,000/- under each head. The Tribunal has awarded 7.5% interest, which is very reasonable and the same is confirmed. The details of the modified compensation as per the above discussions are as under: Loss due to the 50% of disability Rs.1,00,000/- Loss of income during the period of treatment Rs. 7,500/- Pain and Sufferings Rs. 10,000/- Medical Expenses Rs. 32,432/- Transport to Hospital Rs. 5,000/- Extra Nourishment Rs. 5,000/- Attendant Charges Rs. 5,000/- Total Rs.1,64,932/-Less: The amount awarded by the Tribunal Rs. 77,440/- Balance of Award amount Rs. 87,492/- It is rounded off to Rs.87,500/-. Therefore, the claimant is entitled to the enhanced compensation of Rs.87,500/-with interest at 7.5% from the date of petition. 9. Under these circumstances, the respondent transport corporation is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.87,500/-with interest at 7.5% from the date of petition, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the appellant-claimant is permitted to withdraw the same on making proper application. With the above modification, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of. No costs.