Judgment :- 1. Though in the memorandum of grounds, the appellant transport corporation has challenged the finding regarding negligence fixed on the driver of the transport corporation bus and the quantum of compensation awarded to the respondents/claimants, on this day, when the matter came up for hearing, Mr.A.Babu, learned counsel for the appellant transport corporation, has confined his challenge only to the quantum of compensation, in particular to the award of Rs.40,000/- towards future loss of earning and Rs.50,000/-towards pain and suffering, agony and loss of amenities. Therefore, there is no need to advert to the aspect of negligence. 2. In an accident, which occurred on 07.01.2001, minor girl child aged 5 years, sustained a fracture in the right hand and injury in the head, for which, she claimed compensation of Rs.3,00,000/-. The appellant transport corporation resisted the claim, by denying the manner of accident. Without prejudice to the same, they disputed the quantum of compensation claimed under various heads. 3. Before the Tribunal, father of the respondent/claimant examined himself as PW1. PW2 is the witness to the occurrence. PW3 is the Doctor, who examined the respondent/claimant with reference to medical records. Exs.P1 to P10, have been marked on the side of the respondent/claimant. RW1 is the driver of the transport corporation bus and no documentary evidence has been let in by the corporation. 4. On evaluation of pleadings and evidence, the Tribunal found that the driver of the transport corporation bus was negligent in causing the accident and quantified the compensation at Rs.1,30,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum. 5. Mr. A. Babu, learned counsel for the appellant transport corporation submitted that the Tribunal ought not to have awarded a separate compensation of Rs.40,000/-towards future loss of earning, when disability element has already been redressed, and that itis contrary to the Full Bench decision of this Court in Cholan Roadways Corporation Ltd., v. Ahmed Thambi and others reported in 2006 (4) CTC 433 . He submitted that the Tribunal ought not to have awarded Rs.50,000/-towards pain and suffering, agony and loss of amenities. Except the above, no other submissions have been advanced. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the materials available on record. 7. The accident and its manner are not in dispute. It is the case of the respondent/claimant that at the time of accident, she was aged 5 years and a student. Except the above, no other submissions have been advanced. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the materials available on record. 7. The accident and its manner are not in dispute. It is the case of the respondent/claimant that at the time of accident, she was aged 5 years and a student. She sustained a fracture in the right hand, for which, she has taken treatment as inpatient in Jipmer Hospital, Pondicherry, between 08.01.2001 and 10.02.2001, during which, a surgery has been performed. Rods were fixed in the right hand, and that the same were removed on 10.11.2002 and that there was a scar causing disfiguration. PW3 Doctor, who examined the respondent/claimant with reference to medical records, has deposed that the movement of right wrist has been restricted to 110 degrees and that the respondent/claimant would find it difficult to write by using right hand, do other works. He has also noticed a Scar. Considering the difficulties and discomfort expressed by the respondent/claimant, he has assessed the disability at 40% and issued Ex.P7-Disability Certificate. 8. A visible scar will always linger in the mind of a person causing unhappiness, agony. The psychological damage would cause an indelible impact, in the mind of the injured. In a given case, when the scar is visible like on the face, hand, leg or any other visible parts of the body, that would always cause persistent agony and a discomfort though not affecting limbs all the time, but the feeling of others looking at him/her with a difference, due to the visible scar would cause frustration and acute agony. 9. In the case on hand, the injured is a girl, and just aged about 5 years. A scar has been noticed in the right hand. Certainly, the child with a scar would feel unhappiness, as she grows older and if it is on the face, stomach, thigh or any other visible parts of the body, that might even affect the marriage prospects. Scar of a bigger size would reduce the outlook of a person. Disfiguration causes constant agony. Considering the above, even if the Tribunal quantifies certain sum under the head pain, the same would be in relation to period of accident, during pre and post surgery, convalescence and continuance of the pain, depends upon the situs, the usage of limb or part of the body, and the nature of work. Disfiguration causes constant agony. Considering the above, even if the Tribunal quantifies certain sum under the head pain, the same would be in relation to period of accident, during pre and post surgery, convalescence and continuance of the pain, depends upon the situs, the usage of limb or part of the body, and the nature of work. When permanent disablement of the limb or any part of the body would affect the loss of earning capacity, depending upon the work, a visible scar on the face or any other part of the body, would cause a feeling of deep anguish, frustration and agony and it would always remind the injured the horrific experience of the accident. If the cut or lacertaion is deep, the scar would be deep and consequently, the pain and suffering would also steep. Pain balms can reduce agony. But a visible scar causing disfiguration is a pain in the heart. Sufferings in the case of scar would be permanent, provided he/she has the tolerance to ignore the same. Needless to say that the attitude of every man and woman would be to look smart or beautiful, with their out fit, but at the same time, a visible scar would certainly reduce the same, whatever their effort be, as even comfort in dress would not reduce the distress. A person with a visible scar causing disfiguration, would be victim of discrimination, on the grounds of physical appearance and non suited for some jobs. Therefore, this Court is of the view that when there is a visible Scar, Courts/Tribunals should keep in mind the difference between the two, the separate entities, Viz., pain and suffering. Physical pain may cause suffering. But it is not vice versa. Pain may be momentary. But suffering would be constant, depending upon the pitch of severity of the scar. 10. Physical pain may cause suffering. But it is not vice versa. Pain may be momentary. But suffering would be constant, depending upon the pitch of severity of the scar. 10. Though the learned counsel for the appellant transport corporation contended that the Tribunal ought not to have awarded a separate compensation of Rs.40,000/-towards future loss of earning, in addition to the award towards disability, and that the same is contrary to the Full Bench decision of this Court in Cholan Roadways Corporation Ltd., v. Ahmed Thambi and others reported in 2006 (4) CTC 433 , and also contended that the Tribunal ought not to have awarded Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering, agony and loss of amenities, this Court is not inclined to accept the same, for the reason that the restriction in the movement of wrist has been noticed by 110 degrees. A child aged about 5 years has suffered permanent disablement, and when it grows older, it would certainly affect her participation in any work involving physical activity. If itemised compensation is awarded separately for pain and suffering, loss of amenities and other heads, as per Cholan Roadway's case, the quantum of compensation can always be adjusted, considering facts and circumstances of the case. Hence the quantum of compensation is sustained. 11. The appellant transport corporation is directed to deposit the entire award amount with proportionate accrued interest and costs, to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.507 of 2003, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Additional District Court, (Fast Track Court No.II), Cuddalore, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not deposited earlier. Since the respondent/claimant continues to be a minor, the entire award amount with proportionate accrued interest and costs is directed to be deposited in any one of the Nationalised Banks in a Fixed Deposit, proximate to the residence of the respondent/claimant, till she attains majority. The father and guardian of the minor respondent/claimant is permitted to withdraw the accrued interest once in three months. 12. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2012 is closed. No costs.