Judgment :- This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal arise against the award made in MCOP No.257 of 2007 dated 30.11.2007 on the file of the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal and Additional District and Sessions Court (FTC) at Tirupattur. 2. The State Transport Corporation is the appellant herein. 3. The respondent/claimant suffered an accident at about 8.15 a.m., on 20.10.2005. While she was standing on the side of the road after having dropped her two female children at school, she was hit by the bus bearing Registration No. TN 29 No.1159 belonging to the appellant and suffered multiple injuries besides suffering fracture of her left shoulder and left and right knees. The accident resulted in the death of her child in womb as also permanent infertility and loss of cohabitational capacity. 4. Before the Tribunal, the claimant examined herself and a doctor, who certified her percentage of disability at 30%. The following exhibits were marked on the side of the respondent/claimant: (1) Ex.P1 : Certified copy of FIR (2) Ex.P2 : Wound Certificate (3) Ex.P3 : Copy of Discharge summary and in patient certificate (4) Ex.P4 : Copy of CT Scan Report (5) Ex.P5 : Certificate copy of charge sheet (6) Ex.P6 : Certified copy of M.V. Report (7) Ex.P7 series : 39 CMC Hospital bills (8) Ex.P8 : Disability Certificate (9) Ex.P9 : Rental Car Receipts (10) Ex.P.10 : X-Rays The appellant/Transport Corporation examined its conductor, but no exhibits were marked on its behalf. 5. The Tribunal found the rash and negligent driving of the bus belonging to the Transport Corporation the cause of the accident and directed payment of compensation as follows: The total sum of Rs.2,80,535/- was directed to be paid together with interest at 7.5% p.a. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent. 7. In the appeal neither the accident, negligence nor liability to pay compensation is disputed. The challenge is only to the quantum of compensation. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant while submitting that compensation under several heads are excessive particularly would state that having afforded compensation towards permanent disability, the Tribunal ought not to have awarded compensation under the head injuries suffered. 9. The challenge is only to the quantum of compensation. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant while submitting that compensation under several heads are excessive particularly would state that having afforded compensation towards permanent disability, the Tribunal ought not to have awarded compensation under the head injuries suffered. 9. Learned counsel for the respondent on the other hand would state that the findings of the Tribunal are justified and that compensation provided under the head permanent disability was on the lower side as the claimant besides suffering fracture of the left shoulder has suffered fracture of both knees and these are injuries which would have a telling effect on her capacities throughout her life. 10. Considering the rival submissions, this Court finds the award under all other heads except that under permanent disability and for the injuries suffered to be well reasoned. Though this Court would accept the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that compensation could not be provided under two heads viz., permanent disability and for injury suffered as they relate to one and the same head of injury, this Court inclined to direct compensation towards disability at Rs.1500/-per percentage point i.e. Rs.45,000/-. 11. Accordingly, this appeal is ordered on the following lines: 12. In the result, the CMA is partly allowed and the order of the lower forum shall stand modified and the amount of Rs.2,80,535/-awarded by the Tribunal towards compensation shall stand reduced to Rs.2,70,535/-. 3. It is represented that the State Transport Corporation has deposited the entire amount as directed by the Tribunal and the claimant has withdrawn 50% thereof. The respondent/claimant shall be entitled to withdraw the balance amount in keeping with the present order of this Court and the remaining amount shall be refunded to the appellant Transport Corporation. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs.