JUDGMENT : This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred by the appellant/claimant against the award dated 06.04.2009 made in M.C.O.P.No.5248 of 2004 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, IVth Small Causes Court, Chennai. 2. Background of the facts in a nutshell are as follows: The claimant was injured in a motor vehicle accident that took place on 18.01.2004 at about 16.00 hrs. While the claimant was travelling as a pillion rider in a motor cycle bearing Registration No.TN-02-K-6508 at Lyoyds Road, Royapettah, the respondent transportation Corporation bus bearing Registration No.TN-01-N-3269 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the motor cycle. Due to such accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries in all over his body. Thereafter, he was immediately admitted in a Government Royapettah Hospital, Chennai. He claimed a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- as compensation. The respondent-Insurance Company resisted the claim. 3. After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal held that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the transportation Corporation and awarded a sum of Rs.2,43,700/- with interest at 9.5% per annum. Aggrieved by the same, the claimant / appellant herein has filed the present appeal. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the claimant / appellant submitted that at that time of accident, the claimant was a student studying D.M.E. final year and due to the said accident, the claimant had sustained type A fracture of pelvis, fracture of shaft of left femur and fracture of medial malleolus, therefore, the Tribunal ought to have awarded Rs.50,000/- each towards pain and suffering and mental agony, however, without taking note of the injuries suffered by him, it has awarded only Rs.25000/- and Rs.40000/- on those heads and thus, he prayed for enhancement of the compensation on those heads. It is further submitted that while awarding compensation towards permanent disability, the Tribunal, by fixing Rs.1000/- per percentage of disability, has awarded only Rs.60,000/- (60 x 1000) for 60% of permanent disability, therefore, he prayed for fixing Rs.3,000/- per percentage of disability in view of the recent judgment of this Court in National Insurance Company Limited vs. G. Ramesh, reported in 2013 (2) TN MAC 583 and on that basis, he pleaded this Court to enhance the compensation awarded towards permanent disability. 5. 5. Learned counsel for the claimant-appellant further submitted that the amount awarded under various heads by the Tribunal is very low and that it has not followed the principles of assessment before passing the award. Hence, he prayed that since the amount awarded by the Tribunal is very low and meagre, the same may be enhanced as prayed for by the claimant before the Tribunal. 6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Transport Corporation submitted that the Tribunal had considered all the relevant materials and evidence on record and came to the right conclusion and thereby it has awarded a just, fair and reasonable compensation. Hence, the order of the Tribunal is in accordance with law and the same has to be confirmed. It is further submitted that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the rider of the motor cycle and thereafter, the conductor of the bus has deposed that the rider of the bike lost control and fell down along with the pillion rider, hence, driver of the respondent Corporation was in no way responsible for the accident and on that basis, he prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 7. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court. 8. On 18.01.2004, at about 16 hrs., while the claimant was travelling as a pillion rider in a motor cycle bearing Registration No.TN-02-K-6508 at Lloyds road, Royapettah, a bus bearing Registration No.TN-01-N-3269 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, hit the motor cycle and this has resulted in grievance injuries to the claimant all over his body. Immediately, he was admitted in a Government Royapettah Hospital, Chennai. From Ex.P1, it is seen that he took treatment as inpatient at Government Royapettah Hospital from 18.01.2004 to 20.02.2004 and thereafter, he took treatment at Parvathy Ortho Hospital as inpatient from 14.10.2004 to 16.10.2004 as seen from Ex.P3. First Information Register also has been registered, which was marked as Ex.P.2 and on the basis of FIR, the learned Tribunal concluded that the negligence on the part of the driver of the offending bus was the root cause for the siad accident. Besides, at that time of accident, he was 19 years old and studying D.M.E final year. First Information Register also has been registered, which was marked as Ex.P.2 and on the basis of FIR, the learned Tribunal concluded that the negligence on the part of the driver of the offending bus was the root cause for the siad accident. Besides, at that time of accident, he was 19 years old and studying D.M.E final year. From Exs.P.1, 3, 5, 9 and 12, it is seen that he had sustained type A fracture of pelvis, fracture of shaft of left femur and fracture of medical malleolus due to the said accident. Due to such injuries, his education was affected, because he was absent for the semester examinations and as a result, he suffered a huge set back in his life. 9. Thus, from the above said admitted facts, it is clear that he took treatment for about 9 months continuously and even now, he is taking treatment in a Ortho hospital as stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Hence, in my view, the compensation fixed by the Tribunal towards mental agony to the petitioner and parents and towards pain and suffering needs to be modified. Accordingly, this Court hereby awards a sum of Rs.50,000/- each towards mental agony to the petitioner and his parents and towards pain and suffering, instead of Rs.25,000/- and Rs.40,000/- respectively as awarded by the Tribunal. 10. It is further seen that P.W.2-doctor had assessed the disability at 60% and to that effect, he had also issued the disability certificate which was marked as Ex.P11. The Tribunal, while awarding under the head of permanent disability, fixed Rs.1000/- per percentage of disability, which in my view needs to be modified, in view of the recent judgment of this Court in National Insurance Company Limited vs. G. Ramesh, reported in 2013 (2) TN MAC 583, wherein this Court, by taking note of the prevailing expenses to meet the day to day expenses, fixed Rs.3,000/- per percentage of disability. Accordingly, by following the same, this Court hereby awards a sum of Rs.1,80,000/- (60 x 3000) towards permanent disability, instead of Rs.60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Except these modifications, all other compensations under various heads as awarded by the Tribunal are hereby confirmed. Accordingly, by following the same, this Court hereby awards a sum of Rs.1,80,000/- (60 x 3000) towards permanent disability, instead of Rs.60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Except these modifications, all other compensations under various heads as awarded by the Tribunal are hereby confirmed. The details of the modified compensation as per the above said discussions are as under:- Transport expenses Rs.2000 Extra nourishment Rs.10000 Medical expenses Rs.6700 Loss of education Rs.100000 Mental agony to the petitioner & parents Rs.50000 Pain and sufferings Rs.50000 Permanent disability Rs.180000 Total Rs.3,98,700/- The Tribunal has fixed the rate of interest at 9.5% p.a from the date of petition, which, I feel, is just and reasonable one, therefore, the same is not disturbed. 11. In fine, the respondent / transport Corporation is directed to deposit the entire compensation amount of Rs.3,98,700/-, less the amount already deposited if any, to the credit of MCOP No.5248 of 2004, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, IVth Small Causes Court, Chennai, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and on such deposit, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire award amount along with the accrued interest therein lying in the said credit, on making proper application. 12. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands allowed to the extent mentioned above. No Costs.