Judgment :- By consent with the both parties, the appeal itself taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 2. The appeal is preferred by the Transport Corporation-appellant against the award and decreetal order passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Sub Court, Tirupathur) and made in MACTOP No.451 of 2004 dated 20.03.2006. 3. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows: On 29.09.2004 at about 11.00 a.m., the accident had occurred near Marapattur on M.C.Road, in between Ambur-Vaniyambadi. The injured was driving his motorcycle on the extreme left side of the road. At that time, a bus bearing Registration No.TN-23-N-1019 belonging to the appellant/Transport Corporation herein came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the injured. Due to the same, he sustained grievous injuries all over the body. The claimant claimed a sum of Rs.10,00,000/-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.4,82,265/-with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition and the details of the same are as under:- Loss of income due to disability Rs.1,00,000/- Pain Rs. 25,000/- Extra nourishment Rs. 5,000/- Loss of income Rs. 30,000/- Transport charges Rs. 10,000/- Medical expenses Rs.2,87,265/- Loss of suffering Rs. 25,000/-Total... Rs.4,82,265/- 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 and further he contended that the Tribunal ought not to have awarded towards loss of income when awarded towards loss of income due to disability and therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law and the same has to be set aside. 5. 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. On the side of the claimant, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and documents Exs.P1 to P20 were marked. P.W.1 is the claimant. P.W.2 is one Dr.Elango. Ex.P.1 is the copy of the First Information Report. Ex.P.2 is the copy of the wound certificate of the claimant. Ex.P.3 is the recommendation letter sent to the claimant for taking better treatment. Ex.P.4 is the discharge summary issued by the CMC Hospital, Vellore. Ex.P.5 is the series of bills. Ex.P.6 is the series of receipts regarding the treatment taken by the claimant in CMC Hospital, Vellore. Ex.P.7 is the X-ray. Ex.P.8 is the 82 medical bills given by the Vellore CMC Hospital. Ex.P.9 is the receipt with regard to the Registration fees paid to the CMC Hospital, Vellore. Ex.P.10 is the receipt of fees paid on 29.09.2004. Ex.P.11 is the series of six medical bills, which is received from private medical. Ex.P.12 is the 16 receipts about the car rental. Ex.P.13 is the X-ray. Ex.P.14 is the permanent disability certificate of the claimant. Ex.P.15 is the copy of the registration certificate of the claimants motorcycle. Ex.P.16 is the wound certificate of the claimant. Ex.P.17 is the discharge summary of the claimant. Ex.P.18 is the two rental receipts of the ambulance. Ex.P.19 is the copy of the driving license of the claimant. Ex.P.20 is the salary certificate of the claimant. On the side of the appellant-Transport Corporation, R.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Ex.R1 was marked to support their claim. R.W.1 is one Mr. Deenathalayan who is the driver of the bus. R.W.2 is one Mr. Bhaskar, who has travelled in the bus. Ex.R.1 is the recorded statement of the R.W.2. 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 27 years. 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 27 years. He is an employee in Sambalal Jewellers, Ambur and earning a sum of Rs.5,000/-per month. He is PW1 and in his evidence, it is stated that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the appellant/Transport Corporation. The driver of the bus charge sheeted for offences under sections 279 & 338 of IPC in Cr.No.463/2004 by Ambur Rural Police Station. Further, he stated that due to the accident, he sustained grievous injury on his both hands and also injuries in all over the body. Immediately after the accident, he was admitted in Government Hospital, Ambur and later he was admitted in CMC Hospital, Vellore as inpatient. Now, he is taking treatment as outpatient. The claimant claimed that he is earning a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month, but there is no documentary evidence to support the claim. Ex.P20 is the salary certificate, in which it is stated that the claimant is earning a sum of Rs.2,500/- per month. After considering the above oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal has fixed the monthly income at Rs.2,500/-. P.W.2 is one Dr.Elango and in his evidence, it is stated that the claimant was sustained grievous injuries and fracture on his both hands and his teeth were broken and sustained multiple injuries all over the body. Due to the same, he is unable to chew food and also due to the hip and wrist injury, he is unable stand, walk, claim substantially and unable to lift any heavy articles. Also, the claimant is facing difficulty to drive any vehicle. Therefore, the Doctor has assessed the disability at 65%. Ex.P.14 is the disability certificate. There is no dispute regarding the same. After considering the permanent disability at 65%, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and also further awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/-towards loss of income. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant Transport Corporation submitted that the Tribunal ought not to have awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/-towards loss of income. There is no dispute regarding the same. After considering the permanent disability at 65%, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and also further awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/-towards loss of income. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant Transport Corporation submitted that the Tribunal ought not to have awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/-towards loss of income. Normally the Courts used to award Rs.1000/- to 2000/-for each percentage of disability. In this case, after considering the above oral and documentary evidence and also Doctors evidence, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss due to permanent disability of 65%. Therefore, it is just, fair and reasonable award amount and the same is hereby confirmed. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Transport Corporation submitted that apart from awarding towards permanent disability, the Tribunal ought not to have awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards loss of income. He also relied upon A Full Bench of this Court in the case of Cholan Roadways Vs. Ahmed Thambi, reported in 2006 (4) CTC 433 , held that whenever compensation towards permanent disability is awarded, further amount towards loss of income should not be awarded. Applying the principle enunciated in the above Full Bench decision of this Court, the award of the Tribunal in respect of loss of income at Rs.30,000/-is not in accordance with law and therefore, the same is set aside. The Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards pain and another Rs.25,000/-towards suffering. The Tribunal has awarded two separate amounts under the same head. Therefore, after considering the nature of the injury stated above, it is reasonable to award a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards pain and suffering as against Rs.25,000/- towards pain and another sum of Rs.25,000/- towards suffering awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/-towards extra nourishment. After considering that the claimant has taken treatment in various hospital, it is just, fair and reasonable award amount and therefore, the same is hereby confirmed. The Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards transport expenses. Taking into consideration of the Ex.P.12 (rental receipt of the car) and Ex.P.18 (rental receipts of the ambulance), it is just, fair and reasonable award amount and therefore, the same is hereby confirmed. The Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs.2,87,265/-towards medical expenses. Ex.P.5 is the receipt given by the CMC Hospital, Vellore. Taking into consideration of the Ex.P.12 (rental receipt of the car) and Ex.P.18 (rental receipts of the ambulance), it is just, fair and reasonable award amount and therefore, the same is hereby confirmed. The Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs.2,87,265/-towards medical expenses. Ex.P.5 is the receipt given by the CMC Hospital, Vellore. Ex.P.6 to 11 are the series of medical bills given by the CMC Hospital, Vellore. It is actual expenditure. Therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal towards medical expenses is very reasonable and the same is hereby confirmed. Further, the Tribunal also awarded the interest rate at 7.5%, which is very 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 65% disability Rs.1,00,000/- Pain and suffering Rs. 15,000/- Extra nourishment Rs. 5,000/- Transport charges Rs. 10,000/- Medical expenses Rs.2,87,265/- Total... Rs.4,17,265/- Therefore, the claimant is entitled to the modified compensation of Rs.4,17,265/-as against the compensation of Rs.4,82,265/- awarded by the Tribunal. 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 dated 14.09.2007. The claimant is permitted to withdraw the modified award amount of Rs.4,17,265/- with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition, after adjusting the amount, if any, already withdrawn on making proper application. 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. No costs.