JUDGMENT :- 1. By consent of both parties, the main appeals itself are taken up for final disposal at the time of admission. 2. These appeals are preferred by the Transport Corporation against the judgment and decree dated 11.11.2009 made in M.C.O.P.Nos.45 and 46 of 2007 respectively on the file of the Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.I, Poonamallee. 3. Since both the appeals arise out of the same accident, the Tribunal has passed the common order in M.C.O.P Nos.45 and 46 of 2007. Therefore, both the appeals are taken up together and disposed of by a common Judgment. 4. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows: On 14.01.2005 at about 2.30 p.m., both the injured met with Motor vehicle accident. The claimants/respondents 1 and 2 were travelling in Mahindra Van bearing Reg.No.TN01-A-7088, which was proceeding from Chennai to Malmaruvathur. While the said van was nearing Urapakkam Village, a Government Bus bearing Reg.No.TN72N-07788 belonging to the appellant-Transport Corporation, was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and hit the van. Due to the same, both the injured had sustained fractures. Immediately, they were admitted in Aayisha Hospital. In C.M.A.No.3720 of 2011, the claimant claimed a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-. In C.M.No.3721 of 2011, the claimant claimed a compensation of Rs.3,00,000/-. The appellant-Transport Corporation resisted the claim. On pleadings the Tribunal framed the following issues:- "1. On 14.01.2005 at about 2.30 p.m. whether the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the appellant –Transport Corporation Bus? 2. Whether the claimant in M.C.O.P.No.45 of 2007 is entitled to claim compensation? 3. Whether the claimant in M.C.O.P.No.46 of 2007 is entitled to claim compensation?" 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 and awarded a sum of Rs.1,22,200/- as compensation with interest at 7.5% per annum in C.M.A.No.3720 of 2010. In C.M.A.No.3721 of 2010, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,06,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a. The details of the compensation are as follows: C.M.A.No.3720/2010C.M.A.No.3721/2010 Pain and suffering Rs. 30,000/-Rs. 30,000/- Mental Agony Rs. 20,000/-Rs. 20,000/- Medical Bills Rs. 29,700/-Rs. 13,500/- Transport Rs. 1,000/-Rs. 1,000/- Extra-Nourishment Rs. 1,500/-Rs. 1,500/-Loss of income due to 40% disability Rs. 40,000/-Rs. 30,000/-Rs. 30,000/- Mental Agony Rs. 20,000/-Rs. 20,000/- Medical Bills Rs. 29,700/-Rs. 13,500/- Transport Rs. 1,000/-Rs. 1,000/- Extra-Nourishment Rs. 1,500/-Rs. 1,500/-Loss of income due to 40% disability Rs. 40,000/-Rs. 40,000/- ----------------------------------- TotalRs.1,22,200/-Rs.1,06,000/- ------------------------------------- Aggrieved by that award, the Transport Corporation has filed these appeals. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport Corporation questioned only the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and vehemently contended that the award passed by the Tribunal in both the cases are excessive, exorbitant and without basis and justification. He contended that in both the cases, when the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards pain and suffering, it ought not to have awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards Mental Agony. Further, he stated that the injuries are simple in nature. Therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law and the same has to be set aside. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the claimants submitted that the Tribunal has already considered all the relevant materials and evidence on record and came to the right conclusion and awarded a just, fair and reasonable compensation. Hence the order of the Tribunal is in accordance with law and the same has to be confirmed. 7. Heard the learned counsel and perused the materials available on record. In both the cases, the claimants were examined as PW1 and PW2. PW3 is Dr.Sai Chandran, who examined the claimant. The claimants were marked the Exs.P1 to P7. On behalf of the Transport Corporation, no one was examined and no documents were marked to support their claim. Ex.P1 is the copy of the First Information Report dated 14.01.2005. Ex.P2 is the copy of the AIR. Ex.P3 is the discharge summary of the Kanagavalli. Ex.P4 is the medical prescription of the Kanagavalli. Ex.P5 is the medical bills. Ex.P6 is the Medical Receipts. Ex.P7 is the Case Bill dated 23.01.2005. Ex.P8 is the Identity Card of the Kanagavalli. Ex.P9 is the Wound Certificate of the Selvarani, dated 14.01.2005. Ex.P10 is the Medial Bills of the Selvarani. Ex.P11 is the Medical Receipts of the Selvarani. Ex.P12 is the Medical Receipt of the Selvarani. Ex.P13 is the Discharge Summary of the Selvarani, dated 17.01.2005. Ex.P14 is the Disability Certificate of the Kanagavalli. Ex.P15 is the X-ray of the Kanagavalli. Ex.P16 is the Disability Certificate of the Selvarani, dated 14.10.2009. Ex.P17 is the X-ray of the Selvarani. Ex.P11 is the Medical Receipts of the Selvarani. Ex.P12 is the Medical Receipt of the Selvarani. Ex.P13 is the Discharge Summary of the Selvarani, dated 17.01.2005. Ex.P14 is the Disability Certificate of the Kanagavalli. Ex.P15 is the X-ray of the Kanagavalli. Ex.P16 is the Disability Certificate of the Selvarani, dated 14.10.2009. Ex.P17 is the X-ray of the Selvarani. After considering the above 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 and the finding is based on valid materials. In C.M.A.No.3720 of 2010 (M.C.O.P.No.45 of 2007) 8. At the time of accident, the injured-Kanagavalli was aged about 42 years. P.W.1, the claimant, in her evidence, has deposed that she is a house wife. Further, she stated that the driver of the bus caused the accident and a case was registered against the driver of the bus by D-3, Guduvancherry Police Station, Kancheepuram District. After the accident, she was admitted in Aayisha Hospital and she took treatment from 14.01.2005 to 22.01.2005 as in-patient and after discharge, she had been continuing the treatment. Further, she stated that due to the fracture in her right hand, she undergone plastic surgery and plate and screws were fixed and due to the same, she is unable to do her normal work as before. Due to the injury, she is unable to lift any articles. P.W.3 is the Doctor, who examined the claimant, has stated that the claimant was undergone a surgery and plate and screws were also fixed. Due to the same, the movement was restricted to 200 and it is difficult to do her normal work. Therefore, he determined the disability at 40%. Ex.P14 is the Disability Certificate. Ex.P15 is the Ex-ray. After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards 40% disability, which is very low. Normally, the Courts awarded Rs.1,000/- to Rs.2,000/- per percentage of the disability. Considering the same, it would be reasonable to award a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards loss of income due to 40% of disability as against Rs.40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Further, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards Pain and suffering and another sum of Rs.20,000/- towards Mental Agony. Considering the same, it would be reasonable to award a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards loss of income due to 40% of disability as against Rs.40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Further, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards Pain and suffering and another sum of Rs.20,000/- towards Mental Agony. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport Corporation vehemently contended that the Tribunal after awarding a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards pain and suffering, a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony awarded by the Tribunal is unwarranted. The Tribunal ought not to have awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony and the same is unwarranted. Therefore, the award of Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony is deleted. The award amount of Rs.30,000/- towards pain and suffering is very reasonable and the same is confirmed. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.29,700/- towards Medical Bills. The claimant was admitted in the hospital for a period of nine days as in-patient. Ex.P5 and P7 are the series of Medical Bills. It is an actual expenditure incurred by the claimant. Hence, the award amount is very reasonable and the same is confirmed. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,000/- towards transport charges and another sum of Rs.1,500/-towards extra nourishment, which are very reasonable and the same are confirmed. The Tribunal has also awarded interest at 7.5% p.a. After considering the date of accident and prevailing the rate of interest during that period, the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal is very reasonable and the same is confirmed. The details of modified compensation as per the above discussion are as under:- Loss of Income due to 40% disability-Rs. 50,000/- Pain and suffering-Rs. 30,000/- Medical Bills-Rs. 29,700/- Transport Charges-Rs. 1,000/- Extra Nourishment-Rs. 1,500/- ------------------ Total-Rs.1,12,200/- ------------------ Therefore, the claimant is entitled to modified compensation of Rs.1,12,200/- with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition as against Rs.1,22,200/- awarded by the Tribunal. 9. Under those circumstances, the appellant-Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the modified compensation of Rs.1,12,200/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition, less the amount if any, already deposited, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the claimant is also permitted to withdraw the modified compensation less the amount already withdrawn on making proper application. In C.M.A.No.3721 of 2010: 10. On such deposit, the claimant is also permitted to withdraw the modified compensation less the amount already withdrawn on making proper application. In C.M.A.No.3721 of 2010: 10. At the time of accident, the injured-Rani @ Selvarani was aged about 50 years. P.W.2, the claimant, in her evidence, has deposed that she is a house wife. Further, she stated that the driver of the bus caused the accident and a case was registered against the driver of the bus by D-3, Guduvancherry Police Station, Kancheepuram District. Further, she stated that due to the injury, she had sustained fracture in both radius and multiple injuries all over the body. Immediately after the accident, she was admitted in Aayisha Hospital and she took treatment from 14.01.2005 to 17.01.2005 as in-patient. Due to the injury, she is unable to lift any articles and also unable to do her normal work as before. P.W.3 - the Doctor, who examined the claimant, stated that there are two fractures on the elbow. Considering the same, the Doctor assessed the Disability at 40%. Ex.P16 is the disability certificate and Ex.P17 is the X-ray. After considering the above oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.40,000/-towards 40% disability. Normally, the Courts awarded Rs.1,000/- to Rs.2,000/- per percentage of disability. Considering the same, it would be reasonable to award a sum of Rs.50,000/- under this head as against a sum of Rs.40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Further, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards Pain and suffering and another sum of Rs.20,000/- towards Mental Agony. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport Corporation vehemently contended that the Tribunal after awarding a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards pain and suffering, a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony, awarded by the Tribunal is unwarranted. The Tribunal ought not to have awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony and the same is unwarranted. Therefore, the award of Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony is deleted. The award amount of Rs.30,000/- towards pain and suffering is reasonable and the same is confirmed. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.13,500/- towards Medical Bills. The claimant was admitted in the hospital for a period of four days as in-patient. Ex.P10 and P11 are the series of Medical Bills. It is an actual expenditure incurred by the claimant. Hence, the amount awarded under this head is very reasonable and the same is confirmed. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.13,500/- towards Medical Bills. The claimant was admitted in the hospital for a period of four days as in-patient. Ex.P10 and P11 are the series of Medical Bills. It is an actual expenditure incurred by the claimant. Hence, the amount awarded under this head is very reasonable and the same is confirmed. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,000/-towards transport charges and another sum of Rs.1,500/- towards extra nourishment, which are very reasonable and the same are confirmed. The Tribunal has also awarded interested at 7.5% p.a. After considering the date of accident and prevailing the rate of interest, the interest is very reasonable and the same is confirmed. The details of modified compensation as per the above discussion are as under:- Loss of Income due to 40% disability-Rs. 50,000/- Pain and suffering-Rs. 30,000/- Medical Bills-Rs. 13,500/- Transport Charges-Rs. 1,000/- Extra Nourishment-Rs. 1,500/- ------------------ Total-Rs. 96,000/- ------------------ Therefore, the claimant is entitled to modified compensation of Rs.96,000/- with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition as against Rs.1,06,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 11. Under those circumstances, the Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the modified compensation of Rs.96,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition, less the amount, if any, already deposited, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the claimant is also permitted to withdraw the modified compensation less the amount already withdrawn on making proper application. 12. With the above modification, these Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.