Judgment :- 1. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellant/ Transport Corporation against the judgment and decree dated 17.7.2009 made in M.C.O.P.No.412 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri. 2. Not being satisfied with the award and decree passed by the Tribunal, the respondent/claimant has filed the Cross Objection No.60 of 2011 for enhancement of a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-. 3. The short facts of the case are as follows: On 05.04.2006, the petitioner was travelling in the respondent bus bearing Registration No.TN30-N-0136 from Uthangarai to Harur. The driver of the bus had driven the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and at high speed, as a result, the petitioner was thrown into the bus, as a result, he sustained grievous injuries including bone fractures. Hence, the claimant filed the claim petition against respondent for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- with interest. 4. The respondent had filed a counter statement and resisted the claim petition. The respondent denied that the driver had driven the bus in a rash and negligent manner at high speed and caused the said accident. The driver had driven the vehicle with due caution and at moderate speed, at that time a bull all of a sudden started to cross the road and on seeing the same, the driver had applied the brake, as such the accident occurred. The respondent denied the age, income and occupation of the claimant besides the claim amount is excessive. 5. On the plea of both the parties, the Tribunal had framed two issues for consideration, namely; “(i) Was the driver responsible for the said accident? (ii) Whether the claimant is entitled to receive compensation? If so what is the quantum of compensation?” 6. On the side of the claimant, three witnesses had been examined and seven documents were marked, viz., FIR, Wound Certificate, bus ticket, driving licence of the claimant, salary certificate of the claimant, disability certificate and X-ray. On the side of the state Transport Corporation RW.1 driver of the bus was examined and no documents were marked. 7. On the side of the claimant, three witnesses had been examined and seven documents were marked, viz., FIR, Wound Certificate, bus ticket, driving licence of the claimant, salary certificate of the claimant, disability certificate and X-ray. On the side of the state Transport Corporation RW.1 driver of the bus was examined and no documents were marked. 7. PW1 had adduced evidence stating that he was travelling in the respondent bus on 05.04.2006 at about 03.15 pm., from Uthangarai to Harur, when at that time, the driver without adhering to the traffic rules had driven the bus in a rash and negligent manner at high speed, as a result, he was thrown out of the bus into the ground, consequently, he had sustained grievous injuries. PW1 further stated that his spinal card bones 1 to 4 had fractures. He is a driver by profession attached to a private concern and was earning a sum of Rs.5,500/- per month, his age was 40 years. The PW2 doctor had adduced evidence stating that he had examined the claimant and assessed the disability as 21%. The claimant's spinal card bones had fractured. PW1 further stated that immediately after the accident he was taken to the Government Hospital, Harur for preliminary treatment and thereafter shifted to Government Hospital at Dharmapuri for better treatment besides he underwent treatment at various hospitals in Krishnagiri and Kaveripattinam as an inpatient and outpatient, the medical duration period about six months. 8. Considering the evidence of the witnesses, documentary evidence and counter statement of the respondent, the Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.1,51,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum. 9. Aggrieved by the said award, the State Transport Corporation has filed the above appeal to scale down the compensation. 10. Not being satisfied with the award, the claimant has filed the Cross Appeal in Cross Objection No.60 of 2011 for additional compensation a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-. 11. The learned counsel for the Transport Corporation argued that the claimant had undergone treatment at Government Hospitals and he had sustained simple injuries, the doctor assessed the disability as 21%. The Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- under the head of four bone fracture injuries which is not appropriate in this case, hence, as per doctor's evidence, the claimant had sustained 21% disability. 12. The Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- under the head of four bone fracture injuries which is not appropriate in this case, hence, as per doctor's evidence, the claimant had sustained 21% disability. 12. Learned counsel for the claimant argued that the claimant had sustained four bone fracture injuries on his spinal card and as a result, he is unable to do his normal work as a driver, hence his avocation is affected. The Tribunal had not granted adequate compensation on the other heads, attender charges had not been considered. 13. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case and arguments advanced by the learned counsels on either side and on perusing the impugned award of the Tribunal, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Tribunal had granted a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- under the head of four bone fracture injuries, which is not appropriate, since the doctor assessed the disability as 21%. The disability certificate also marked, therefore, this Court finds it prudent to grant the compensation as follows:- Rs.42,000/-, Rs.20,000/-, Rs.5,000/-, Rs.5,000/-, Rs.5,000/-, Rs.18,000/- and Rs.20,000/- towards disability, pain and suffering, attender charges, transport, nutrition, medical expenses, loss of income during medical treatment and convalescing period respectively. In total, this Court awards a sum of Rs.1,15,000/- which is fair and justifiable in the instant case. Therefore, this Court scales down the compensation from Rs.1,51,000/- to Rs.1,15,000/- and this amount will carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till the date of payment of compensation. 14. Therefore, this Court directs the appellant / State Transport Corporation to deposit the modified compensation amount, as observed above to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.412 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the order. After such a deposit being made, it is open to the claimant to withdraw the modified compensation amount lying in the credit of M.C.O.P.No.412 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri, after filing a Memo along with this order. 15. Resultantly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by the appellant / State Transport Corporation in C.M.A.No.303 of 2010 is partly allowed and the Cross Appeal filed by the claimant in Cross Objection No.60 of 2011 is dismissed. 15. Resultantly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by the appellant / State Transport Corporation in C.M.A.No.303 of 2010 is partly allowed and the Cross Appeal filed by the claimant in Cross Objection No.60 of 2011 is dismissed. Consequently, the award and decree passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri made in M.C.O.P.No.412 of 2007, dated 17.07.2009 is modified. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.There is no order as to costs.