Judgment :- 1. The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant/United India Insurance Co., Ranipet, against the Award and Decree, dated 07.12.2004, made in M.C.O.P.No.59 of 2002, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ Sub Court, Cheyyar, awarding a compensation of Rs.1,02,110/- together with interest at the rate of 9% interest per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till the date of payment of the compensation. 2. Aggrieved by the above said award and decree passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, the appellant/United India Insurance Company has filed the above appeal to scale down the compensation amount. 3. The short facts of the case are as follows: While the petitioner was coming from Valli Ammal Polytechnic to his residence as a Pillion rider on G.S.T. Road near S.R.M.College at Potheri on 21.08.2001 at about 3.30 p.m., by a scooter bearing Registration No.TN 22 7921 towards Maraimalai Nagar direction, one TVS Champ bearing Registration No.TN.25 X 3417 came from the opposite direction in a very rash and negligent manner and hit against the scooterist and the petitioner had fallen down and thus caused grievous injuries. The petitioner is aged about 16 years. He was hale and healthy. He is studying at Valli Ammal Polytechnic as an excellent student. Due to the accident, he has lost his concentration, he is not able to walk as freely. Due to the accident, his left leg was fractured. He is unable to do his normal work. He has suffered grievous injury and permanent disability. The first respondent is the owner of the vehicle. The driver who drove the vehicle employed as a driver at the time of accident. The second respondent is the Insurance Company in which the vehicle was insured with. The third respondent is the petitioners vehicle Insurance Company being added for effective adjudication of this claim petition. The petitioner therefore claimed a compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs only) with interest cost thereon against Respondents 1 and 2. 4. The second respondent -United India Insurance Company had filed a counter statement and resisted the claim petition, which reads as follows:- “The respondent submits that the accident had occurred due to calluding of two vehicles that is scooter and TVS Champ. The scooterist is not having valid licence and the petitioners bus not impleaded by the owner of the scooter. The second respondent -United India Insurance Company had filed a counter statement and resisted the claim petition, which reads as follows:- “The respondent submits that the accident had occurred due to calluding of two vehicles that is scooter and TVS Champ. The scooterist is not having valid licence and the petitioners bus not impleaded by the owner of the scooter. The application is badly lacking in all material particulars and not confirming to the rules and procedures. The respondent reserves its liberty and craves leave to file additional counter and when the application is properly rectified. This respondent denies and repudiates all the allegations in the petition specifically and puts the petitioner to the strict proof of the age of the claimant, income, occupation, manner of accident, his injuries and hospital expenses and also the details mentioned in column 21 Part(1)and (2) and the disability claimed”. 5. After considering the plea of the claimant and counter statement of the second respondent, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, had framed two issues for consideration namely: 1) Whether the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the first respondent vehicle? 2) Whether the claimant is entitled to get compensation? If so, what is the quantum of compensation? 6. On the side of the claimant two witnesses were examined, namely, PW.1, who is the mother of the claimant and PW.2 Doctor Kannan and 11 documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P11 namely, Ex.P1- Copy of the First Information Report, Ex.P2- Copy of the Accident Register, Ex.P3-Copy of the final Report, Ex.P4-Copy of the Motor Inspector Report for two wheeler bearing registration No.TN25X3417, Ex.P5-Copy of the School certificate of the injured person, Ex.P6- Discharge Medical summary issued by Chengalpet Hospital, Ex.P7- Medical bill series, Ex.P8 – Ambulance Bill, Ex.P9 – Motor Vehicle Inspectors Report to the vehicle bearing registration No. TN 22-7921, Ex.B10-Rough Sketch, Ex.B11-Permanent Disability certificate. On the side of the respondents no witnesses was examined and no documents were marked. 7. PW.1 had adduced evidence stating that on 28.08.2001, his son was going to Valli Ammal Polytechnic as pillion rider on GST road near SRM College at Potheri at 3.30 p.m., the scooter bearing registration No.TN 22 7921 proceeding towards Maraimalai Nagar direction, one TVS Champ came from opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and hit the scooterist. 7. PW.1 had adduced evidence stating that on 28.08.2001, his son was going to Valli Ammal Polytechnic as pillion rider on GST road near SRM College at Potheri at 3.30 p.m., the scooter bearing registration No.TN 22 7921 proceeding towards Maraimalai Nagar direction, one TVS Champ came from opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and hit the scooterist. In the result, he had fallen down and sustained grievous injuries. The PW.1 had further adduced evidence stating that after the accident, the injured was unable to do his normal work. Immediately after the said accident, he was taken to the Government Hospital, Chengalpattu, wherein he was treated as inpatient from 21.08.2001 to 03.09.2001. The said accident case was registered on the rider of the two wheeler-TVS Champ. 8. PW.2 Doctor had adduced evidence stating that he examined the injured and assessed the disability as 40%. He further adduced evidence stating that his left leg thigh bone was fractured and deformed. As such the injured person is not able to walk, run etc., 9. After considering the evidence of PW.1 and PW.2 and documents marked as Exhibits, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal came to a conclusion that the first respondents vehicles rider is responsible for the said accident and awarded the compensation as follows:- Loss of Income - Rs.96,000/- Pain and sufferings - Rs. 5,000/- Medical Bills and - Rs. 960/- Ambulance charges - Rs. 950/- -Rs.1,02,910/- In total, Tribunal awarded 1,02,910/-with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of payment of compensation. The Tribunal further directed the second respondent to deposit the said amount, within a period of two months from the date of its order. Inturn the said compensation amount to be deposited in a Nationalised Bank for a period of three years under the fixed deposit scheme. Accordingly ordered 10. Aggrieved by the said award and decree, the appellant/United India Insurance Company has filed the above appeal to scale down the said compensation passed by the Tribunal. 11. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal had adopted multiplier method, which is not pertinent to this case. Further, injured person was hospitalised from 21.08.2001 to 03.09.2001 as inpatient. Further, the learned counsel specifically argued that the disability of 40% assessed by the Doctor is also erroneous. 11. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal had adopted multiplier method, which is not pertinent to this case. Further, injured person was hospitalised from 21.08.2001 to 03.09.2001 as inpatient. Further, the learned counsel specifically argued that the disability of 40% assessed by the Doctor is also erroneous. Hence, the learned counsel prays to scale down the said award. 12. Considering the facts and circumstances, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant and the award and decree passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, this Court is of the view that the injured person was a school going boy and at the time of accident his age was 16 years. The Tribunal awarded compensation is erroneous, considering the nature of the injuries the multiplier method is also not applicable to the instant case. As such, this Court, decided to restructure the compensation as follows:- Loss of Income for 40% disability -Rs.70,000 Transport -Rs. 5,000 Pain and sufferings -Rs.10,000 Nutrition -Rs. 6,000 Medical Expenses -Rs. 960 Ambulance Charges -Rs. 950 TOTAL -Rs.92,910 In total this Court awards Rs.92,910/-with interest at the rate of 9% per annum as fixed by the Tribunal. Therefore, this court hereby scale down the compensation from Rs.1,02,910 to Rs.92,910/-. 13. On 07.12.2004 this Court directed to deposit the entire compensation amount with accrued interest into the credit of M.C.O.P.No.59 of 2002, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Cheyyar. 14. It is open to the claimant to withdraw the compensation amount for a sum of Rs.92,910/- with accrued interest thereon, lying in the credit of MCOP No. 59 of 2002, on the file of the Sub Court, Cheyyar by filing necessary payment out application, subject to deduction of withdrawals if any, in caccordance with law. Likewise the appellant / Insurance company is at liberty to withdraw the excess sum of Rs.10,000/-with accrued interest thereon, lying in the credit of MCOP NO.59 of 2002, on the file of Sub Court, Cheyyar after observing necessary formalities. 15. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly` allowed and the award and decree passed in the M.C.O.P.No.52 of 2002 dated 07.12.2004, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Cheyyar is modified. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.