Judgment :- The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant / New India Assurance Co. Ltd., against the award and decree passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, II Small Causes Court, Chennai, in M.C.O.P.No.3985 of 1999, dated 27.01.2005, awarding a compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of filing the claim petition till the date of payment of compensation. 2. Aggrieved by the said award and decree, the appellant/New India Assurance Co. Ltd has filed the above appeal, praying to set aside the award passed by the Tribunal. 3. The short facts of the case are as follows: On 18.07.1999 at 20.30 hrs. the petitioner was walking along MTH Road on the northern side, while he was walking opposite to Wheels India Ltd., Padi, the Motor Cycle TN01-L-0179, came from west to east in MTH Road in a very high speed, rash and negligent manner and dashed against the petitioner. Due to which, he sustained multiple fractures and injuries. The rider of the Motor Cycle is solely and directly responsible for the accident. Hence, the 1st respondent as the owner and the 2nd respondent as the Insurer of the Motor Cycle are jointly, severally and vicariously liable to pay compensation to the injured petitioner with interests and cost. 4. The Appellant/second respondent had filed a counter statement and resisted the claim petition on the following grounds: Similarly the loss of earning from 19.07.1999 to 18.12.1999 taken by the petitioner as classified as (anticipated) at the rate of Rs.6,300/- p.m. amounting to Rs.31,500/- is not admitted. Similarly a sum of Rs.3,500/- claimed towards transport to the hospital is not admitted. So also damages towards clothing and articles alleged to have been sustained in a sum of Rs.500/- and claim for extra nourishment of Rs.15,000/- is not admitted. The costs of treatment and transport expenses in a sum of Rs.15,000/-claimed under Part-I(g) is not admitted. So also a sum of Rs.15,000/- for pain and suffering and loss sustained by the wife of the petitioner is also not admitted. Further, amount of Rs.10,000/- claimed towards additional transport expenses is also not admitted. So also the amount of Rs.14,500/- towards mental agony and torture due to limping and shortening of leg is not admitted. So also a sum of Rs.15,000/- for pain and suffering and loss sustained by the wife of the petitioner is also not admitted. Further, amount of Rs.10,000/- claimed towards additional transport expenses is also not admitted. So also the amount of Rs.14,500/- towards mental agony and torture due to limping and shortening of leg is not admitted. The claim in Part-II (h) on account of compensation for pain and suffering in a sum of Rs.45,000/- is highly exaggerated and not admitted. As in the case of other claims and also seeking for compensation in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- for continuing and permanent disability is denied and not admitted. The petitioner abruptly absconding the hospital put a cloud on the entire claim of the petitioner. Similarly the claim for Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for the loss of earning is also vehemently denied and there is no foundation whatsoever or liability for making any in all such claims. This respondent submits that it is for the petitioner to prove each and every item of the claim in the absence of documentary proof filed along with the petition and served on this respondent. This respondent craves leave to file an additional counter on the basis of any disclosure of materials and also necessary applications under the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act seeking leave of this Honourable Court for appropriate reliefs as and when advised. For the foregoing reasons it is humbly prayed this Honourable Tribunal may be pleased to dismiss the petition with cost. 5. On considering the claim petition and the counter statement of the respondent, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal had framed two issues, namely: 1. Who is responsible for the Accident? 2. What is the quantum of compensation which he is entitled? 6. On the side of the claimant, three witnesses were examined namely P.W.1 – the claimant, A.Maria Sebastian, P.W.2 – R.Satheesh Kumar, P.W.3 – Dr.Thiyagarajan and 9 documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P9 namely: Ex.P1- Puthoor O.P.Sheet, issued by the Puthoor Bone Setting Centre Ex.P2- Medical Receipt series, issued by the Puthoor Hospital, Ex.P3- Salary Certificate, Ex.P4 – Leave Certificate, Ex.P5 – Medical Bills Series, Ex.P6 – First Information Report, Ex.P7 – Rough Sketch, Ex.P8 – Case Sheet and Ex.P9 – Disability Certificate. On the side of the respondents, two witness were examined, namely, R.W.1. - Mr.S.Govindan, R.W.2 – Mr.Ramu and no documents were marked. 7. On the side of the respondents, two witness were examined, namely, R.W.1. - Mr.S.Govindan, R.W.2 – Mr.Ramu and no documents were marked. 7. The claimant, P.W.1 had adduced evidence stating that on 18.07.1999 at about 8.30 a.m., he was walking on the M.T.H.Road from East to North. At that time, the first respondent motor Cycle, bearing registration No.TN 01L 0179, came in the opposite direction, i.e. West to East at high speed in rash and negligent manner and dashed against him. In the result, he sustained bone fracture injuries in his left leg below knee, on his left shoulder and on his left hand wrist, several internal injuries in Chest, leading to blood clothing. He further stated that immediately, after the said accident, he was taken to the K.M.C. Hospital, wherein, he was admitted as in-patient for three days. He further stated that after discharge from the K.M.C. Hospital, he was taken to the Puthoor Bone Setting Hospital for further treatment. He further stated that he was admitted to the Puthoor Bone Setting Centre for sometimes. He further stated that before the accident, he was a driver, working at the TANCI Polish Unit. After the accident, he could not attend the duty for about 8 months. Further, he had marked as Ex.P1, Out-Patient Sheet issued by the Puthoor Hospital, Ex.P2, Medical Receipts, Ex.P3 – Salary Certificate, Ex.P4 – Leave Certificate, Ex.P5 – Medical Bill series, Ex.P6 – FIR, Ex.P7 – Rough Sketch, Ex.P8 – Case Sheet. 8. R.W.1 had stated that the claimant is a driver and working in the TANSI Company and he was on Medical Leave from 19.07.1999 to 24.11.1999. Thereafter, he joined his duty and performed his duty normally as driver. 9. P.W.2 – Dr.R.Sathishkumar stated that the claimant was admitted at K.M.C. Hospital on 18.07.1999 as inpatient for few days. Thereafter, he was discharged from the hospital. He further stated that the claimant sustained bone fracture injuries in left hand forearm and on his left leg below knee. Thereafter, he stated that his left leg was shortened by one inch. He also verified the Medical Records of the claimant and also examined the claimant and assessed the disability as 45%. The Doctor further opined that 450 movement was reduced on his left leg and 200 movement was reduced on his left hand. Thereafter, he stated that his left leg was shortened by one inch. He also verified the Medical Records of the claimant and also examined the claimant and assessed the disability as 45%. The Doctor further opined that 450 movement was reduced on his left leg and 200 movement was reduced on his left hand. In order to prove the same, the PW2 also marked as Ex.P9- disability Certificate 10. After considering the evidence of either side and documents marked as exhibits, the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, came to the conclusion that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the rider of the first respondents vehicle. As such, the insurance company is liable to pay compensation to the claimant and awarded the compensation as follows: a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards loss of income, a sum of Rs.3,000/-towards transport expenses, a sum of Rs.14,000/-towards extra nourishment, a sum of Rs.200/- towards damage to clothes, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-under the head of permanent disability, a sum of Rs.50,000/- under the head of loss of earning capacity. In total, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.2,50,200/- as compensation to the claimant together with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till the date of payment of compensation. Further, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal directed the New India Assurance Company Ltd. to deposit the entire award amount of Rs.2,50,200/-with accrued interest within a period of two months from the date of the order. In turn, the said amount to be deposited in any one of a Nationalised Bank for a period of three years. The Tribunal had fixed a sum of Rs.8,000/- as Advocate Fees and accordingly, ordered. 11. Aggrieved by the said award and decree, the appellant / New India Assurance Co. Ltd. has filed the above appeal. 12. The learned counsel for the appellant argued that the learned Tribunal ought not to have awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/-on the head of loss of earning capacity since the claimant was reinstated in the job after ensuring the fitness certificate. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/- under the head of Loss of Income, which is erroneous. The learned counsel further argued that the award amount of Rs.2,50,000/- is excessive and exorbitant. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/- under the head of Loss of Income, which is erroneous. The learned counsel further argued that the award amount of Rs.2,50,000/- is excessive and exorbitant. Further, the learned counsel argued that the Tribunal awarded Rs.1,00,000/- under the head of disability and Rs.50,000/-under the head of loss of earning capacity, which are also not pertinent in the incident case. Hence, he prayed this Court to scale down the compensation amount. 12. The learned counsel for the first respondent / claimant argued that the claimant sustained bone fracture injuries on his left hand, left leg and on his left shoulder and also sustained injuries all over the body. The claimant had undergone treatment at the KMC Hospital as inpatient. Thereafter, he was referred to the Puthoor Bone Setting Centre, wherein he had undergone treatment for the period of five months. After the accident, he could not attend his duty as a driver in TANSI Co. Ltd. The learned counsel further argued that the claimants age was 40 years old and he had drawn a sum of Rs.6,300/- p.m. The claimants left leg was shortened by one inch and his bone fractured are deformed. The claimants left hand and left leg movement are reduced by 200 and 450 respectively. After considering the evidence of both sides and perused the documentary evidence, the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, awarded the compensation of Rs.2,50,000/-, which is fair and equitable. As such, the above such miscellaneous appeal is not maintainable. 13. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by the learned counsel on either sides and the findings of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, this Court is of the view that the quantum of compensation is on higher side. Hence, this Court decides to restructure the compensation as follows: a sum of Rs.90,000/-towards loss of income for 45% disability, Rs.3,753/- towards medical expenses, Rs.40,000/-towards loss of income during the treatment period, a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards pain and suffering, a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards extra nourishment, a sum of Rs.15,000/-towards transport expenses, a sum of Rs.15,000/-towards attendant charges, a sum of Rs.200/- towards damage to clothes. In total, this Court awards a sum of Rs.1,93,953/-together with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of filing of claim petition till the date of payment of compensation. 14. In total, this Court awards a sum of Rs.1,93,953/-together with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of filing of claim petition till the date of payment of compensation. 14. This court imposed the condition, on 23.12.2005, on the appellant / New India Assurance Company Ltd., to deposit 50% of the award amount with accrued interest thereon into the credit of the M.C.O.P.No.3985 of 1999, on the file of the II Small Causes Court, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chennai. Now, this Court hereby directs the appellant / New India Assurance Company Ltd., to deposit the balance compensation of amount with accrued interest thereon, as per this Court findings, into the credit of MCOP No.3985 of 1999, on the file of the II Small Causes Court, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chennai, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 15. After such deposit being made, it is open to the claimant to withdraw the balance compensation amount with accrued interest thereon, lying to the credit of the MCOP No.3985 of 1999 on the file of the II Small Causes Court, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chennai, after filing necessary payment application in accordance with law, subject to the deduction of earlier withdrawals if any. 18. In the result, the above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed and the award and decree passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, II Small Causes Court is modified. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.