Judgment 1. On 05.02.2004, the (deceased) Joseph was travelling as a pillion rider on a motor cycle bearing registration No.TN-63C-3143, driven by her husband, on the Thiruppathur to Devakottai main road and at about 11.00 a.m., the respondent's bus bearing registration No.TN-67N-0020 driven by its driver at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and coming in the opposite direction dashed against the motor cycle. In the result, the rider of the motor cycle fell down on the left side of the road and the pillion rider i.e., the deceased fell down on the right side of the road and the right rear wheel of the bus crushed the deceased, who died on the spot. Hence, the legal heir of the deceased has filed the claim petition and claimed compensation of a sum of Rs.16,00,000/-with interest from the respondent/Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation. 2. The respondent had filed a counter statement and resisted the claim petition. The respondent stated that the respondent's bus bearing registration No.TN-67N-0020 was taken for trip by its driver from Puliadithambam towards Devakottai, when the bus was nearing N.S.M.V.P.S Higher Secondary School, the driver had applied the sudden brake, since the motor cycle coming on the opposite direction had ridden his bike in a rash and negligent manner but inspite of this, the motorcyclist dashed his vehicle against the bus and caused the accident. The averments in the claim regarding age, income and occupation of the deceased was also not admitted. 3. After considering the averments of both parties, the Tribunal had framed two issues namely: (1) Whether the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of respondent's driver while driving the bus bearing registration No.TN-67N-0020? Or due to rash and negligent driving of the 1st petitioner while driving the motor cycle bearing registration No.TN-63C-3143?; (2) Whether the respondent is liable to pay compensation? If so, how much amount are the petitioners entitled?. 4. On the side of the claimant, PW.1 was examined and nine documents were marked namely: Ex.P1-F.I.R; Ex.P2-post mortem certificate; Ex.P3-Motor Vehicle Inspector's Report pertaining to TN-67N-0020; Ex.P4-Motor Vehicle Inspector's Report pertaining to TN-63C-3143 motorcycle; Ex.P5-charge sheet; Ex.P6-pay certificate of deceased; Ex.P7-Attested copy of marks statement pertaining to deceased; Ex.P8-Attested copy of transfer certificate pertaining to deceased; Ex.P9-Attested copy of driving licence pertaining to P.W.1. On the side of the respondent, RW.1 was examined and no document was marked. 5. PW.1, had adduced evidence stating that the deceased was his wife and she was aged 33 years at the time of accident and that she was a teacher by profession in the Thungulam R.C School and was earning Rs.8,469/- per month as gross salary. The 2nd and 3rd claimants are the minor sons. 6. On considering the age, income and occupation of the deceased, the tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.10,08,440/-as total compensation, after adopting a multiplier of 17', with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the petition till date of deposit of compensation. 7. Aggrieved by the said award and decree passed by the tribunal, the appellant/Transport Corporation has filed the above appeal. The learned counsel for the appellant argued that the tribunal had wrongly concluded that the driver of the bus had committed the said accident by his rash and negligent driving. Actually, the 1st claimant, who had ridden the motor cycle rode the motor cycle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the bus and the accident was as a result of ahead on collusion between the vehicles and as such contributory negligence should be attributed. The deceased income had not been properly assessed by the tribunal since the claimants had not produced last pay drawn salary certificate, with necessary particulars regarding statutory deductions. In order to prove the same, the 1st claimant has to produce the necessary certificates and employer's evidence. In the absence of employer's evidence, the tribunal had erroneously fixed the income of the deceased as Rs.7,415/- per month. The learned counsel further submits that the tribunal's awarded of Rs.25,000/-towards loss of love and affection is also on the higher side. 8. The learned counsel for the claimants submits that the salary certificate was marked as Ex.P6 and the deceased was aged about 32 years and the order to prove the same, mark sheet had been marked. Further, the deceased was a qualified teacher and she was working as a permanent teaching staff. 9. Therefore, the tribunal, considering the oral and documentary evidence, including the F.I.R had fixed the liability and quantum in an appropriate manner. The tribunal had not granted an adequate compensation under the head of funeral expenses. Further, the deceased was a qualified teacher and she was working as a permanent teaching staff. 9. Therefore, the tribunal, considering the oral and documentary evidence, including the F.I.R had fixed the liability and quantum in an appropriate manner. The tribunal had not granted an adequate compensation under the head of funeral expenses. Besides, this the tribunal had not granted compensation towards transport expenses. 10. 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 passed by the tribunal, this Court does not find any discrepancy in the conclusions arrived at regarding liability and quantum of compensation. This Court further opines that the tribunal had assessed the quantum of compensation on the basis of valid documents namely pay certificates, educational qualification certificate and number of dependents and had correctly assessed the compensation. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned award. As per this Court records, it is seen that this Court directed the appellant to deposit entire award amount together with interests and costs. 11. Now, it is open to the 1st claimant to withdraw his apportioned share amount with proportionate interest thereon lying in the credit of M.C.O.P.No.35 of 2005, on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, District Judge, Sivagangai, after filing a memo along with a copy of this order. This Court further directs the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to deposit the minor claimant's apportioned share amount with accrued interest thereon in the names of the minor claimants in a nationalized bank as fixed deposit under the cumulative deposit scheme till they attain the age of major. The fixed deposit certificates shall be handed over to the 1st claimant, i.e., the father of the minors. 12. In the result, the above appeal is dismissed. Consequently, the judgment and decree passed in M.C.O.P.No.35 of 2005, dated 20.04.2006, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, District Judge, Sivagangai, is confirmed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.