Judgment :- The appeal is preferred by the claimant against award dated 19.07.2004 made in MCOP No.307 of 2001 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Sub-Court), Ranipet. 2. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows: The claimant/injured one Siddick, met with motor traffic accident on 15.01.2001 at 2.00 p.m. The said injured was proceeding in his scooter bearing Registration No.TN-23-E-3488 Vellore-Ambur Road. At that time, a bus bearing registration No.TN-23-N-1416 belonging to the respondent-Transport Corporation, which came in the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner, hit against the scooter. Due to which the injured sustained instantaneous multiple grievous injuries all over the body. The claimant/appellant claimed a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation. On pleadings the Tribunal framed the following issues:- “1. On whose negligence the accident had occurred? 2. What is the compensation the claimant is entitled to? 3. To what relief?” 3. 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 respondent’s Transport Corporation bus and awarded a compensation of Rs.1,46,840/-with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition and the details of the same are as under:- Permanent Disability 40% Rs.40,000/- Loss of Income during the treatment Period Rs. 4,000/- Transport Charges Rs. 500/-Extra Nourishment Rs. 500/-Medical bills Rs.86,840/- Pain and Sufferings Rs. 5,000/- Loss of earning capacity Rs.10,000/- Total Rs.1,46,840/- Aggrieved by that award, the claimant has filed the present appeal for enhancement. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the claimant-appellant questioned only quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and submitted that the Tribunal ought to have awarded compensation as claimed by the claimant and 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 meager and seeks to enhance the compensation. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Transport Corporation 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 and perused the documents and records. Hence the order of the Tribunal is in accordance with law and the same has to be confirmed. 6. Heard the counsel and perused the documents and records. On the side of the claimant, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and documents Exs.P1 to P6 were marked. On the side of the respondents, RW1, one Mahadevan was examined and no documents were marked to substantiate their claim. P.W.1 is the claimant. PW2 is Dr. Riaz Ahamed, who examined the injured and assessed disability at 60% and issued Disability Certificate Ex.P6 to that effect. Ex.P1 is xerox copy of F.I.R., Ex.P.2 is Discharge Summary. Ex.P3 to P5 are Medical bills series. 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 respondent-Transport Corporation and the finding is based on valid materials and evidence. 7. At the time of the accident, the deceased was aged about 30 years. He was working as Manager in Arabic College, Shembakkam, Vellore. He claimed that he was earning Rs.3,000/- per month. P.W.1 the claimant in his evidence has deposed that the accident has occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the respondent’s Corporation Vehicle. The driver of the vehicle also charge sheeted by the Virinjipuram Police Station in Cr.No.17/2001 under Sections 279 and 338 I.P.C. Further, he stated in his evidence that due to accident he sustained the following injuries:- 1. Multiple grievous injuries on the head. 2. Fracture on the right leg thigh joint. 3. Multiple injuries on the skull. 4. crushed injury on the lower lip. Immediately after the accident he was admitted in the Government CMC Hospital, Vellore, as inpatient. He stated that due to the accident he is having frequent headache and giddiness. P.W.2 Doctor, who examined the injured determined the disability at 60%. But the Tribunal without giving any reason reduced the disability to 40% and awarded a sum of Rs.40,000/-. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contended that once an expert doctor given a certificate regarding the assessment of disability the same should be accepted and the Tribunal should not be reduced or deleted. In this case, the disability to the claimant assessed by P.W.2 at 60% is accepted. Normally the Courts award Rs.1,000/- to Rs.2,000/- per percentage of disability. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contended that once an expert doctor given a certificate regarding the assessment of disability the same should be accepted and the Tribunal should not be reduced or deleted. In this case, the disability to the claimant assessed by P.W.2 at 60% is accepted. Normally the Courts award Rs.1,000/- to Rs.2,000/- per percentage of disability. In this case after taking note of the injuries and also disability certificate Ex.P.6, and also the evidence of the claimant, in which, it is stated the he cannot do any work as before because of head injury and getting giddiness very often and the Discharge Summary issued by the Government CMC Hospital Vellore, in which, it is stated that the claimant sustained grievous head injury, fracture on the right leg thigh joint, multiple injuries on the skull and crush injury on the lower lip, it is reasonable to award Rs.2,000/- per percentage of disability and the loss of income works out to Rs.1,20,000/- towards 60% ( 60 x 2000) as against Rs.40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/-towards pain and sufferings. After taking note of the injures sustained by the claimant and also the evidence of the doctor it is reasonable to award Rs.15,000/- as against Rs.5,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal awarded Rs.4,000/-towards loss of income during the treatment period which is very reasonable and the same is confirmed. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.500/- each towards transport charges and extra nourishment is very low and meager. Hence, it would be reasonable to award Rs.3,000/-each towards transport charges and extra nourishment as against Rs.500/-each awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs.86,840/-towards medical expenses. Ex.P.3 to P.5 are medical bills series, which are actual expenses incurred by the claimant and therefore, the same is confirmed. The award made by the Tribunal towards loss of earning capacity at Rs.10,000/-also very reasonable and the same is confirmed. Keeping in view the prevailing rate of interest during that time, the interest awarded by the Tribunal is reasonable and the same is confirmed. The details of the enhanced compensation as per the above discussion are as under:- Permanent Disability 60% Rs.1,20,000/- Loss of Income during the treatment period Rs. 4,000/- Transport Charges Rs. 3,000/- Extra Nourishment Rs. 3,000/- Medical bills Rs. 86,840/- Pain and sufferings Rs. The details of the enhanced compensation as per the above discussion are as under:- Permanent Disability 60% Rs.1,20,000/- Loss of Income during the treatment period Rs. 4,000/- Transport Charges Rs. 3,000/- Extra Nourishment Rs. 3,000/- Medical bills Rs. 86,840/- Pain and sufferings Rs. 15,000/- Loss of earning capacity Rs. 10,000/- Total Rs.2,31,840/- Les. Already awarded amount Rs.1,46,840/- Enhanced amount Rs. 85,000/- Therefore, the claimant is entitled to the enhanced compensation of Rs.85,000/-with interest at 9% from the date of petition. 9. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Transport Corporation is directed to the deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.85,000/-with interest at 9% from the date of petition within a period of eight 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 proper application. 10. With the above modification, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of. No costs.