Judgment 1. On 09.071998, at about 03.45 p.m., the claimant was proceeding from Shanmuga Engineering College on the Tanjavore to Trichy main road, as a pillion rider of the motorcycle bearing registration No.KL7S-7582 and at that point of time the 1st respondents mini lorry driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the rider of the motor cycle, in the result he had sustained bone fracture injuries, hence the claimant filed a claim petition against the owner and insurer and claiming a compensation of a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- with interest. 2. The 3rd respondent/Insurance Company has filed a counter statement and denied the accident. The respondent further stated that the rider of the motor cycle had driven the TVS-50 in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the mini lorry, as a result, the claimant had fall in off from the vehicle. As such, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay compensation. 3. After considering the averments made by both parties, two issues were framed namely: (1) Whether the 2nd respondent had driven the mini lorry on 09.07.1999 in a rash and negligent manner and caused the accident?; (2) If so, what is the quantum of compensation, the claimant is entitled to receive?. 4. On the side of the claimant he was examined as PW.1 and the doctor was examined as PW.2. On the side of the respondent no witness was examined and no document was marked. The claimant had marked the below mentioned documents namely: Ex.P1-F.I.R; Ex.P2-rough sketch; Ex.P3-accident report; Ex.P4-Motor Vehicle Inspector's report; Ex.P5-copy of judgment of Criminal Court; Ex.P6-medical records issued by Vikram Hospital, Madurai; Ex.P27-Motor Vehicle Inspection report; Ex.P28-disability certificate; and other exhibits upto ex.P47-all are medical records. 5. PW.1, had adduced evidence that he was a 2nd year MCA student, on 09.07.1998, his friend Karthikeyan had ridden the motor cycle and he was travelling as a pillion rider on the motor cycle bearing registration No.KL-7S-7582, on the Tanjavore Vallam road and at that point of time the 1st respondent's mini lorry came from opposite direction and dashed against the two wheeler. PW.1, further stated that, in the said accident, his left leg had been damaged completely below the knee. He was hospitalized from 09.07.1998 to 14.07.1998 as an inpatient at Tanjavore medical college hospital, thereafter he had undergone medical treatment from 14.07.1998 for a period of six months. PW.1, further stated that, in the said accident, his left leg had been damaged completely below the knee. He was hospitalized from 09.07.1998 to 14.07.1998 as an inpatient at Tanjavore medical college hospital, thereafter he had undergone medical treatment from 14.07.1998 for a period of six months. Subsequently, he underwent treatment at Vikram hospital, Madurai. PW.1, further stated that he is unable to walk without a clutch and he had spent around Rs.6,00,000/- towards medical expenses. 6. PW.2, Doctor had adduced evidence stating that he had examined the claimant after taking x ray and on verifying the entire medical records had assessed the disability at 55% had been sustained by PW.1 at the accident. His left leg has been shortened by ½ (inch). PW.2, further stated that the claimants left leg muscles had been crushed and the same was removed, skin grafting was conducted, even though the injured portion had not been set right. 7. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case and on considering the claimants higher education i.e., MCA course, the claimant is now unable to continue his studies further. Hence, the tribunal had granted a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- as lumpsum compensation, this amount will carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the time of filing the claim petition till the date of payment of compensation. Aggrieved by the said award passed by the tribunal, the Insurance Company has filed the above appeal. The learned counsel for the appellant argued that the rider of the motor cycle had driven the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the stationed mini lorry, as a result the pillion rider/claimant had fallen down. In the said accident two vehicles had been involved as such contributory negligence ought to be considered. The tribunal had granted a lumpsum compensation a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- which is not appropriate. The medical bills that had been produced by the claimant is not bonofide. The doctor had assessed the disability as 55%, which is also on the higher side. 8. The learned counsel for the claimant argued that the claimant is a 2nd year MCA student at the time of the accident, after this accident, he is not able to continue his studies further. Claimant left leg below the knee had been completely damaged. The doctor had assessed the disability as 55%, which is also on the higher side. 8. The learned counsel for the claimant argued that the claimant is a 2nd year MCA student at the time of the accident, after this accident, he is not able to continue his studies further. Claimant left leg below the knee had been completely damaged. The learned counsel had produced a photocopy (attached) and also the claimant had appeared at the open Court. The learned counsel further submitted that skin grafting surgery was conduced on the left leg of the claimant, even though the operation was not a success. The claimant's left leg has become disfigured and with an impairment. 9. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case and on the arguments by the learned counsels and on perusing the impugned award of the tribunal, this Court is of the view that lumpsum compensation is not appropriate in the instant case, therefore, this Court assesses the compensation is follows: Rs.1,10,000/- under the head of disability; Rs.25,000/- towards pain and suffering; Rs.15,000/- towards transport; Rs.15,000/- towards nutrition; Rs.15,000/- towards attender charges; Rs.1,00,000/-toward medical expenses; Rs.2,00,000/-towards permanent discomfort, loss of amenities and disfigurement. In total, this Court awards Rs.4,80,000/- as compensation as it is found to the appropriate in the instant case. This amount will carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of compensation. As per Court records, it is seen that the entire compensation had been deposited, after deposit the claimant has been permitted to withdraw a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-and Rs.3,00,000/- respectively. Therefore, this Court scales down the compensation from Rs.7,00,000/- to Rs.4,80,000/- with accrued interest at the rate of 9% per annum. 10. Now, it is open to the claimant to withdraw a sum of Rs.4,80,000/- with interest after deducting any earlier withdrawals made by the claimant lying in the credit of M.C.O.P.No.896 of 1999, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge, Pudukottai, after filing a memo along with a copy of this order. The appellant is at liberty to withdraw the excess compensation with interest after filing a memo. 11. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. The appellant is at liberty to withdraw the excess compensation with interest after filing a memo. 11. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed. Consequently, the Award and Decree, passed in M.C.O.P.No.896 of 1999, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge, Pudukottai, dated 30.03.2002, is modified. No costs.