Judgment :- 1. The appeal is preferred by the appellant-Transport Corporation against the Judgment and Decree dated 09.10.2003 made in M.C.O.P.No.63 of 2003 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Additional District Judge), Virudhachalam. 2. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows: One injured Sivasubramanian met with motor vehicle accident on 11.08.2000 at about 6.00 P.M. The said injured was riding his bicycle on Cuddalore to Virudhachalam main road. While he was riding his bicycle at Koonankurichy Amman Koil Bus stop, a bus bearing registration No.TN-32.N.0869, belonging to the appellant-Transport Corporation came in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and hit the cyclist. Due to the impact, the injured was thrown out of the cycle and sustained fracture and grievous injuries all over the body. He claimed compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-. 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 driver of the bus belonging to the appellant-Transport Corporation or not? 2. What is the compensation, the claimant is entitled to? 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 bus belonging to the appellant transport corporation and awarded compensation of Rs.75,500/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of claim petition and the details of the same are as under:- Loss of income due to 30% disability =Rs. 67,500/- Pain and sufferings=Rs. 5,000/- Medical bill & Transport charges=Rs. 3,000/- Total=Rs. 75,500/- Aggrieved by that award, the appellant-Transport Corporation has filed the present appeal. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport Corporation questioned only the quantum of the award and vehemently contended that the award passed by the Tribunal is excessive, exorbitant, and also without any basis and justification. Therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law and the same should be set aside. 4. The Learned counsel appearing for the claimant submitted that the Tribunal has considered all the facts and circumstances of the case and awarded a just, fair and reasonable compensation. Therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is in accordance with law and the same should be confirmed. 5. Heard the counsel. 4. The Learned counsel appearing for the claimant submitted that the Tribunal has considered all the facts and circumstances of the case and awarded a just, fair and reasonable compensation. Therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is in accordance with law and the same should be confirmed. 5. Heard the counsel. On the side of the claimant, P.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and documents Exs.P1 to P7 were marked. On the side of the appellant-Transport Corporation no one was examined and no document was marked to substantiate their claim. P.W.1 is the claimant. P.W.2 M.G.R, who is the eyewitness of the accident. P.W.3 is Dr.Palani. Ex.P1 dated 04.08.2000 is the copy of the First Information Report. Ex.P2 is the copy of the driving licence. Ex.P3 is the copy of the Motor Vehicle Inspectors Report. Ex.P4 dated 04.08.2000 is the copy of the wound certificate. Ex.P5 is the photo with negative. Ex.P6 dated 09.09.2003 is the permanent disability certificate. Ex.P7 is X-ray. After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal has given a categorical finding that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus. It is a question of fact. The finding is based on valid materials and therefore the same is confirmed. 6. At the time of accident, the claimant was aged about 15 years. P.W.1 is the claimant. In his evidence, it is stated that he is working as a painter and he claimed that he was earning a sum of Rs.2,500/- per month and further stated that only the driver of the bus caused the accident and the driver was also charge sheeted by U.Mangalam Police Station in Crime No.187/2000 under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC. Due to the accident, the claimant sustained following injuries: Grievous injuries in right great toe, fracture in right wrist, fracture in right ankle joint, injury in the right little toe, injury in the left upper leg and injuries all over the body. Immediately after the accident, he was admitted in Government Hospital, Virudhachalam and later, he was referred to Government Hospital Cuddalore. P.W.3 is Dr.Palani, who examined the injured and determined the disability at 42%. Ex.P6 is the Disability Certificate. In his evidence, it is stated that there is a fracture in the right ankle joint and fracture in wrist and fracture in the right angle joint. P.W.3 is Dr.Palani, who examined the injured and determined the disability at 42%. Ex.P6 is the Disability Certificate. In his evidence, it is stated that there is a fracture in the right ankle joint and fracture in wrist and fracture in the right angle joint. Ex.P7 is X-ray. In his evidence, it is further stated that due to the injury, there is a restricted movement of wrist and due to the same, he could not lift heavy articles. However, the Tribunal was of the view that the disability assessed by the doctor is excessive and therefore reduced the same to 30% and further the Tribunal has fixed the approximate annual income at Rs.15,000/-. After taking into consideration of the age of the injured, the Tribunal adopted multiplier 15 and arrived at the loss due to 30% disability at Rs.67,500/-(15,000X15X30/100). The learned counsel appearing for the appellant vehemently contended that it is not the fit case for adopting multiplier method and there is no finding that 30% disability affects the earning capacity of the claimant. Therefore, the correct method to be adopted in the present case is only percentage method. Normally, Courts award a sum of Rs.1000/- to Rs.2000/-per percentage of disability. After taking into consideration of the nature of injury available on record, it is reasonable to award a sum of Rs.2000/- per percentage of disability. If, Rs.2,000/-is awarded, the loss due to 30% disability works out to Rs.60,000/-(Rs.2,000x30). Therefore, the claimant is entitled to Rs.60,000/- towards loss due to 30% disability as against Rs.67,500/- awarded by the Tribunal. Further, the Tribunal awarded sum of Rs.5,000/-towards pain and sufferings. After taking into consideration of the nature of injury, the award of Rs.5,000/-towards pain and sufferings is reasonable and the same is confirmed. The Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs.3,000/- medical and transport expenses. He was taken treatment in Government Hospital, Vriudhachalam, as well as the Government Hospital, Cuddalore. After taking into consideration of the same, it is reasonable to award a sum of Rs.6,000/- towards medical and transport expenses as against Rs.3,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal awarded interest of 9% p.a. After taking into consideration of the date of accident, date of award and the prevailing rate of interest during that period the interest of 9%, awarded by the Tribunal is reasonable and the same is confirmed. The Tribunal awarded interest of 9% p.a. After taking into consideration of the date of accident, date of award and the prevailing rate of interest during that period the interest of 9%, awarded by the Tribunal is reasonable and the same is confirmed. The details of the modified compensation as per the above discussion are as under:- loss of income due to 30% disability=Rs.60,000/- Pain and suffering=Rs. 5,000/- Medical and Transport charges=Rs. 6,000/- Total=Rs.71,000/- 7. In the result, the claimant is entitled to the modified compensation of Rs.71,000/-with interest at 9% p.a from the date of claim petition. It is stated by the learned counsel for the appellant-Transport Corporation that the entire award amount has already been deposited by the Court order dated 12.04.2006 and the claimant was also permitted to withdraw 50% of the award amount with accrued interest. Under these circumstances, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the modified compensation of Rs.71,000/-with interest at 9% p.a., less 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 modifications, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of. No costs.