Judgment : 1. At the outset, Mr. K.J. Sivakumar, learned counsel for the appellant -Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Limited, Kancheepuram Region, Kancheepuram, submitted that challenge in this appeal is restricted to the quantum of compensation of Rs.1,21,700/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum, from the date of claim, till the date of realisation, awarded to the respondent. 2. In the light of the above restricted challenge, this Court deems it fit to consider as to whether the Claims Tribunal has taken into consideration, the principles of just compensation, while determining the quantum. The accident has occurred on 08.08.2006.According to the respondent/claimant, aged about 47 years, he sustained injuries, was treated in hospital and incurred expenses. 3. Upon perusal of Ex.P.3-Accident Register, issued by the Government Hospital, the Claims Tribunal has noticed that the respondent has sustained a fracture of clavicle bone. On perusal of Ex.P.5-Discharge Summary, issued by the Government General Hospital, Chennai, the Claims Tribunal has recorded that the respondent was admitted on 10.08.2006 and discharged on 11.08.2006. There is also a reference in Ex.P.5-Discharge Summary that the respondents sustained 3/3 cm, abrasion over the right cheek, 2/2 cm, abrasion over the nose and 2/1 cm abrasion over the forehead. Ex.P.7-Bills for repairing TVS 50 Moped, bearing Registration No.TN-01Q-7646, hit by the Transport Corporation bus, bearing Registration No.TN-21N-895, have also been filed. Based on the same, the Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.3,000/- for damages to vehicle. 4. PW2-Doctor, who clinically examined the respondent/claimant, with reference to the medical records Ex.P.3-Accident Register, Ex.P.4-Prescriptions, Ex.P.5-Discharge Summary and Ex.P.9-X-ray, has observed that the respondent/claimant has sustained a fracture of clavicle bone. Having regard to the discomfort experienced by the respondent/claimant and based on his observation, he has assessed the extent of disablement as 30%. As stated supra, at the time of accident, the respondent was aged about 47 years. He had earned Rs.5,326/- per month, as an Office Assistant in the Government General Hospital, Chennai. Considering the fact that he continued to work, the Claims Tribunal did not award any compensation under the head, loss of future earning capacity, however, it chose to award compensation of Rs.60,000/- under the head disability. In addition to the above, the Claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.11,652/- under the head loss of income for two months. Considering the fact that he continued to work, the Claims Tribunal did not award any compensation under the head, loss of future earning capacity, however, it chose to award compensation of Rs.60,000/- under the head disability. In addition to the above, the Claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.11,652/- under the head loss of income for two months. A sum of Rs.5,000/- for Transportation, Rs.5,000/- for extra nourishment, Rs.3,000/- for damage to vehicle, Rs.2,000/- for attendant charges and Rs.30,000/- for pain and suffering, has been awarded. Altogether, the Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,21,652/-, as compensation rounded off to Rs.1,21,700/- with interest @7.5% per annum from the date of claim, till the date of realisation. 5. Though Mr. K.J. Sivakumar, learned counsel for the appellant Transport Corporation assailed the quantum of compensation as excessive, material on record discloses that to prove the nature of injuries, period of treatment, expenses incurred, the respondent/ claimant has adduced oral and documentary evidence. Fracture of clavicle bone, would certainly cause discomfort. The injured has suffered pain, when undergoing treatment. A sum of Rs.60,000/- (@Rs.2,000/- per percentage of disability) awarded under the head disability, cannot be said to be manifestly illegal, in the light of the decisions of this Court in Prahalath Jasmathiya v. V.Sankaranreported in 2009 (5) MLJ 1549 (Mad-Noc) and the Managing Director, Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam Division II) Ltd., Trichy Vs. S.Kannappan, reported in 2007 (2) TN MAC 1. 6. Though the respondent/claimant was hospitalised only for two days, certainly, the fracture would have immobilized him, hence, the Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.11,652/- under the head loss of income, during the period of treatment and convalesce i.e, for two months. Compensation awarded under the other heads, appears to be reasonable. 7. In the light of the above decision and discussion, this Court is not inclined to reduce the quantum of compensation. Hence, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. Hence, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Compensation awarded under the other heads, appears to be reasonable. 7. In the light of the above decision and discussion, this Court is not inclined to reduce the quantum of compensation. Hence, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. Hence, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Consequent to the dismissal of this appeal, the appellant – Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the award amount, with proportionate accrued interest and costs, less the statutory deposit, to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.3780 of 2007 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (VI Court of Small Causes), Chennai, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not deposited earlier. On such deposit, the respondent/claimant, is permitted to withdraw the entire amount by making necessary applications.