JUDGMENT :- 1. The respondent herein / claimant was travelling on his TVS 50 motorcycle on 29.03.1999, at about 8.00 a.m. on the Somanayakanpatti Main Road, on the extreme left of the road and at that point of time, the respondent's bus bearing Registration No.TN-23-N-0773, coming in the opposite direction and driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the claimant. As a result, the claimant had sustained injuries. Hence, the claim petition has been filed against the Transport Corporation. 2. The respondent Corporation had filed a counter statement and resisted the claim petition. The respondent stated that the bus was proceeding on the Tiruppathur Main Road in a normal speed and the bus was stopped at Vettapattu bus stop for alighting the passengers. After this, the bus was started after the conductor had given the whistle. At that point of time, the claimant had ridden his TVS 50 from a Sub Road and come out the main road in a negligent manner and dashed against the bus. As such, the accident had been invited by him. The rider of the motorcycle did not have a valid driving licence. Further, the averments in the claim regarding age, income and nature of injuries were denied. The respondent further stated that the owner of the TVS 50 and its insurer are necessary parties in the proceedings, but they have not been impleaded as necessary parties. 3. On verifying the averments of both parties, the Tribunal had framed three issues namely: (1) Whether the accident had been caused by the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the respondent's bus? (2) Whether the respondent is liable to pay compensation? and (3) What is the quantum of compensation? 4. The claimant was examined as PW1 and he had marked 7 documents namely: F.I.R; Medical discharge summary; CMC Hospital Medical records; Medical chits; Medical records regarding inpatient treatment and Taxi receipt. On the side of the respondent one witness was examined as RW1 and no document was marked. PW1 had adduced evidence that he was travelling on his motorcycle on 29.03.1999 at about 8.00 a.m. On the Somanayakanpatti Main Road and at that time, the respondent's bus bearing Registration No.TN-23-N-0773, driven by its driver at a high speed and in a reckless manner dashed against him. PW1 had adduced evidence that he was travelling on his motorcycle on 29.03.1999 at about 8.00 a.m. On the Somanayakanpatti Main Road and at that time, the respondent's bus bearing Registration No.TN-23-N-0773, driven by its driver at a high speed and in a reckless manner dashed against him. As a result, he had sustained injuries on his left side of skull, right hand, forehead, both of his legs. He further stated that he was doing Beedi manufacturing business and was earning Rs.200/- per day. 5. On considering the evidence of PW 1, the Tribunal had granted Rs.1,93,500/- as compensation, with interest. Against the said award, the Transport Corporation has filed the above appeal. The highly competent counsel argued that the Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.1,93,500/- to the claimant, which is excessive since he had sustained simple injuries. Further, the Doctor had not been examined in order to prove the nature of injuries and disability. The Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.40,000/-under the head of pain and mental agony which is on the higher side. The Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.45,000/- under the head of disability and had again awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/- under the head of loss of earning capacity. Therefore, the compensation amount is on the higher side. 6. The highly competent counsel for the claimant argued that the claimant had sustained head injuries and he had been hospitalized at Ambur Pathasadar Hospital, wherein he had been given preliminary treatment and therefore he was rushed to the CMC Hospital, Vellore, wherein he had been hospitalized as an inpatient in the intensive care unit for a long time, since his brain had been affected. The claimant had spent a sum of Rs.60,000/- for medical expenses. The nature of injuries, mode of treatment and medical expenses had been proved through documentary evidence. The claimant had been taken to hospital after engaging a car on hire. 7. On verifying the facts and circumstances of the case and arguments advanced by the learned counsel on either side and on perusing the impugned award of the Tribunal, this Court does not find any discrepancy in the conclusions arrived at regarding negligence and liability. However, the quantum of compensation is on the higher side. 7. On verifying the facts and circumstances of the case and arguments advanced by the learned counsel on either side and on perusing the impugned award of the Tribunal, this Court does not find any discrepancy in the conclusions arrived at regarding negligence and liability. However, the quantum of compensation is on the higher side. Therefore, this Court reassesses the compensation as follows: Rs.45,000/- is awarded towards disability; Rs.15,000/- towards pain and suffering; Rs.10,000/- towards transport; Rs.10,000/- towards nutrition; Rs.10,000/- towards attender charges; Rs.10,000/- towards loss of earning during medical treatment period and Rs.60,000/- towards medical expenses. In total, this Court awards Rs.1,60,000/-as compensation as it is found to be appropriate in the instant case. The rate of interest remains unaltered. As such, this Court scales down the compensation as mentioned above. This Court directed the appellant to deposit the entire compensation amount with interest. 8. Now, the claimant is at liberty to withdraw a sum of Rs.1,60,000/- with proportionate interest, lying in the credit of M.C.O.P.No.419 of 2000, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Court, Thiruppathur, after filing a memo, along with a copy of this order. Likewise, the appellant is at liberty to withdraw the excess compensation amount with accrued interest thereon, after filing a memo. 9. In the result, the above appeal is partly allowed. Consequently, the award and decree passed in M.C.O.P.No.419 of 2000, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Subordinate Court, Thiruppathur, dated 04.11.2003, is modified. No costs.