Judgment :- The appeal is preferred by the appellant-Transport Corporation against the award dated 07.06.2001 made in MCOP No.321 of 2001 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal ( Sub Court), Tirupattur 2. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows: The injured Srinivasan met with motor vehicle accident that took place on 17.5.2001 at about 7.30 a.m. The said injured was proceeding as a pillion rider along with rider one Palani in the Silver Plus vehicle bearing Regn.No.TSE 7019 on the extreme left side of the road towards Tirupattur. At that time, a bus bearing Registration No.TN-23-N-0949 came in the opposite side, in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and hit the Silver Plus. Due to the same, the pillion rider sustained grievous injuries all over the body and he was taken to the Government Hospital, Tirupattur for treatment. He claimed a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- 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? 3. 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 appellant- Transport Corporation and awarded a compensation of Rs.1,42,000/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition and the details of the same are as under:- Loss of IncomeRs.60,000/- Transport ChargesRs. 2,000/- Pain and sufferingsRs.40,000/- Permanent disabilityRs.30,000/- Loss of future incomeRs.10,000/- Total... Rs.1,42,000/- Aggrieved by that award, the Transport Corporation has filed the present appeal. 3. 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. The Tribunal ought not to have awarded Rs.60,000/-towards loss of income when there is no proof available in the record. He further submitted that the Tribunal is wrongly awarded Rs.40,000/- towards pain and sufferings and Rs.10,000/-towards loss of future income and therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law and the same has to be set aside. 4. He further submitted that the Tribunal is wrongly awarded Rs.40,000/- towards pain and sufferings and Rs.10,000/-towards loss of future income and 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/claimants 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. The injured himself examined as P.W.2. P.W.3 is Doctor Elangovan. On the side of the claimant documents Exs.P1 to P11 were marked. On the side of the appellant-Transport Corporation RW1-K. Ranganathan was examined and no document was marked to support their claim. Ex.P1 is the copy of the First Information Report. Ex.P2 is the certified copy of Charge Sheet. Ex.P3 is the copy of the Motor Vehicle Inspectors report. Ex.P4 is the copy of the charge sheet. Exs.P8 and P9 are the wound certificate and Disability Certificate of the injured Srinivasan. Ex.P10 is X-ray. Ex.P11 is the claimants medical bills. 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 appellant-Transport Corporation bus driver and the finding is based on valid materials and evidence. 6. At the time of accident, the claimant was aged about 19 years old. He is vegetable vendor and was earning Rs.3000/- per month. PW2-the claimant has deposed that immediately after the accident, he took treatment at Government Hospital, Tirupattur. He also deposed that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver and the Tirupattur Taluk Police registered a case in Cr.No.326/2001 under Sections 279 and 337 I.P.C. He further stated the due to the accident, he sustained grievous injuries and he is unable to walk, stand and climb in the steps and also unable to work as before. Ex.P.8 is wound certificate, in which, it is stated that the said Srinivasan sustained grievous injuries. Therefore, the Tribunal has assessed that the injuries sustained by the claimant affects his earning capacity and awarded a sum of Rs.60,000/- towards loss of income. Ex.P.8 is wound certificate, in which, it is stated that the said Srinivasan sustained grievous injuries. Therefore, the Tribunal has assessed that the injuries sustained by the claimant affects his earning capacity and awarded a sum of Rs.60,000/- towards loss of income. There is no evidence available on record to show that he was admitted in the hospital for a long time and hence, during that period. He was admitted in the hospital merely a short time and during that period he has not earned income. Hence, it is reasonable to award Rs.6,000/-under this head as against Rs.60000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal awarded Rs.2,000/- towards transport charges, which is very low. Considering the fact that the claimant has taken treatment after discharge from the hospital, it is reasonable to award Rs.5,000/-towards transport expenses as against Rs.2,000/-awarded by the Tribunal. Considering the evidence of PW3-doctor, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards permanent disability. The Doctor P.W.3, who examined the claimant has deposed that, based on the grievous injuries, he determined the permanent disability at 30%. Normally the Courts award Rs.1,000/- to Rs.2,000/-per percentage of disability. It is clear that the Tribunal has fixed Rs.1000/- per percentage of disability. Considering the nature of injuries sustained, Ex.P8 Wound Certificate, Ex.P9 Disability Certificate and Ex.P.10 X-ray, it would be reasonable to award Rs.2,000/-per percentage of the disability. Hence Rs.60,000/- (Rs.2,000 x 30%) is awarded towards permanent disability instead of Rs.30,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has also awarded a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards pain and suffering. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport Corporation vehemently contended that the amount awarded under this head is excessive and without basis and justification. Considering the nature of injury sustained, I feel that it would be appropriate to award a sum of Rs.10,000/-under this head as against Rs.40,000/-awarded by the Tribunal. Ex.P.11 series are medical bills. It is an actual expenditure incurred by the claimant. The Tribunal has not awarded any sum towards medical expenses. Considering the medical bills, it is reasonable to award Rs.5,000/- towards Madical Expenses. Likewise, the Tribunal has not awarded compensation towards extra nourishment for which also claimant is entitled. Therefore, Rs.5,000/- is awarded towards extra nourishment. The Tribunal has fixed the rate of interest at 9% p.a from the date of petition, which is reasonable and the same is confirmed. Considering the medical bills, it is reasonable to award Rs.5,000/- towards Madical Expenses. Likewise, the Tribunal has not awarded compensation towards extra nourishment for which also claimant is entitled. Therefore, Rs.5,000/- is awarded towards extra nourishment. The Tribunal has fixed the rate of interest at 9% p.a from the date of petition, which is reasonable and the same is confirmed. The details of modified compensation as per the above discussion are as under:- Loss of Income during the treatment periodRs. 6,000/- Transport ChargesRs. 5,000/- Pain and sufferingsRs. 10,000/- Permanent disabilityRs. 60,000/- Medical ExpensesRs. 5,000/- Extra Nourishment Rs. 5,000/- Total...Rs. 91,000/- Therefore, the claimant is entitled to the modified compensation of Rs.91,000/-with interest at 9% p.a as against the compensation of Rs.1,42,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 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 9.8.2005 and the claimant was also permitted to withdraw 50% of the same by order dated 14.12.2005. The claimant is permitted to withdraw the balance modified award amount of Rs.91,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition after adjusting the amount already withdrawn on making proper application. 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.