Judgment : 1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.1561 of 2009, dated 11.10.2012 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(III Additional Subordinate Court),Tiruchirappalli. 2. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the respondent and perused the materials available on record. 3. The respondent had filed a claim petition for compensation of Rs.2 lakhs for the injuries sustained in the accident occurred on 20.02.2009 against the appellant/Transport Corporation. 4. The respondent has filed a counter and contested the above said case by contending that the accident took place only due to the negligence of the deceased and not by the driver of the appellant-Transport Corporation bus and therefore the appellant/Transport Corporation is not liable to pay compensation. Further contended that the compensation claimed by the claimant is excessive. 5. The trial Court after hearing both sides oral and documentary evidence, finally held that the accident took place only due to the rash and negligent driving of the appellant bus driver and therefore the appellant/Transport Corporation is liable to pay compensation. Further the Tribunal has passed an award of Rs.2,06,790/-. Aggrieved over the above said award passed by the Tribunal, the appellant/Transport Corporation has preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. 6. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the tribunal has wrongly fixed the negligence on the driver of the appellant bus driver on the basis of the First Information Report, but failed to consider the oral evidence of the driver of the bus and therefore the above said finding is not correct. 7. Admittedly, a criminal case was registered only against the driver of the appellant bus driver. On the side of the claimant examined the injured Petitioner as P.W.1 and also examined one Thandapani as P.W.3-eye-witness to the occurrence. On the side of the claimant has also marked Ex.P1-copy of the First Information Report. Per contra on the side of the appellant examined the driver of the bus as R.W.1 and no document has been marked. 8. From the above said oral and documentary evidence, it would reveal that the accident took place only on the negligence of the appellant bus driver as alleged by the claimant and a criminal case was registered only against the driver of the appellant/Transport Corporation. 8. From the above said oral and documentary evidence, it would reveal that the accident took place only on the negligence of the appellant bus driver as alleged by the claimant and a criminal case was registered only against the driver of the appellant/Transport Corporation. Therefore the finding of the Tribunal regarding the negligence aspect is correct and there is no need to interfere with the above said finding. 9. With regard to the quantum of compensation, the Tribunal has passed an award of Rs.90,000/-for permanent disability, Rs.10,000/- for pain and suffering, Rs.5,000/-for extra nourishment, Rs.5,000/- for transport expenses and Rs.95,790/- for medical expenses and totally Rs.2,06,790/-was awarded as compensation. Admittedly, the petitioner sustained grievous injuries. On the side of the claimant examined P.W.2-doctor who assessed the disability of the claimant. The above said doctor has issued Ex.P11- disability Certificate and also deposed before the Tribunal by stating that the disability sustained by the injured claimant is 48%. But the Tribunal has reduced the above said disability as 45%. Any how, considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant and other relative factors, this Court is of the view that the above said disability assessed by the Tribunal and awarded Rs.90,000/-for the above said disability is not excessive as contended by the learned counsel for the appellant. With regard to medical expenses, the claimant has produced the relevant documents to prove the above said expenses as correct. Considering the document and oral evidence, the above said award of Rs.95,790.00/- for medical expenses is correct. With regard to other heads, the Tribunal has correctly assessed the compensation and the above said compensation for all heads are not excessive as contended by the learned counsel for the appellant. Therefore considering the nature of injuries, disability, medical expenses and other factors, this Court is of the view that the award passed by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and hence there is no need to interfere with the said award awarded by the tribunal. 10. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and the award of the Tribunal is confirmed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. No costs.