JUDGMENT : V.M. Velumani, J. These Civil Miscellaneous Appeals have been filed against the Award dated 16.10.2015, made in MCOP.No.547 of 2014, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Special Sub Court, Thirunelveli. 2. Both the appeals are arising out of the same Award dated 16.10.2015, made in MCOP.No.547 of 2014, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Special Sub Court, Thirunelveli. CMA(MD).No. 934 of 2016 is filed by the respondent/Transport Corporation to set aside the said award. CMA.697 of 2018 is filed by the claimant for enhancement of compensation. The parties are referred to as per their rank in MCOP. 3. According to the claimant, on 17.05.2014, while he was travelling in the bus belonging to the respondent/Transport Corporation, the driver of bus drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the electric post and caused accident. In the accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries and claimed a total sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- as compensation. 4. The respondent/Transport Corporation filed counter statement and denied the manner, in which the accident occurred and denied the negligence on the part of the driver of the respondent. According to the respondent, the claimant was stretched out his hand through window. The claimant, in spite of warning, did not keep his hands inside the bus and invited the accident. In any event, the driver of the bus is not responsible for accident and the amount claimed by the petitioner is excessive. 5. The Tribunal considering the pleadings oral and documentary evidence, held that the accident occurred only due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the bus. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, awarded a sum of Rs. 4,94,325/- as compensation. 6. Aggrieved by the said Award, the respondent/Transport Corporation filed the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in CMA(MD).No.934 of 2016. The claimant filed CMA(MD).No.697 of 2018, for enhancement of compensation. 7. According to the learned counsel for the respondent, Transport Corporation, the Tribunal erred in fixing the entire negligence on the part of the driver of the bus. The Tribunal failed to consider that the claimant sitting in rear seat, stretched out his hand through the window and invited the accident. He further contended that the driver of the respondent, Transport Corporation is not responsible for accident and the claimant himself invited the accident due to his negligence. The Tribunal failed to consider that the claimant sitting in rear seat, stretched out his hand through the window and invited the accident. He further contended that the driver of the respondent, Transport Corporation is not responsible for accident and the claimant himself invited the accident due to his negligence. He further contended that the compensation awarded under various heads and interest awarded at the rate of 9% per annum are excessive. 8. The learned counsel appearing for the claimant contended that the claimant sustained severe injuries and he is unable to do his work of erecting the shed as he was doing before the accident in view of the injuries in his hand, which is necessary for erecting the shed. The Tribunal ought to have fixed monthly income of the claimant at Rs. 10,000/- instead of Rs. 5,000/- per month and applied multiplier method to arrive at compensation for loss of income. He further contended that the amount awarded under different heads is very meagre and claiming for enhancement of compensation as mentioned in the grounds of appeal. 9. I have heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record. 10. From the materials on record, it is seen that the Tribunal has appreciated the evidence let in by the parties has rightly concluded that the accident occurred only due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the bus. There is no reason to interfere with the said finding. 11. The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the claimant is that the Tribunal ought to have applied multiplier method, is without merits. The claimant has not let in any evidence to prove that he is totally immobilised and unable to do his work, as he was doing before the accident. The amount awarded by the Tribunal, towards permanent disability, based on percentage of the disability, is in order. The learned counsel appearing for the claimant contended that the claimant was earning a sum of Rs. 15,000/-. But, he did not substantiate the said claim. In such circumstances, the Tribunal fixed notional income of the claimant at Rs. 5,000/- per month. In the appeal, the learned counsel appearing for the claimant further contended that the Tribunal ought to have fixed the monthly income of the claimant at Rs. 10,000/- and added 30% towards future prospects. The said contention is without merits. In such circumstances, the Tribunal fixed notional income of the claimant at Rs. 5,000/- per month. In the appeal, the learned counsel appearing for the claimant further contended that the Tribunal ought to have fixed the monthly income of the claimant at Rs. 10,000/- and added 30% towards future prospects. The said contention is without merits. The learned counsel appearing for the claimant has not substantiated as to how the notional income can be fixed at Rs. 10,000/- per month and 30% has to be added towards future prospects and hence, CMA(MD).No.697 of 2018 is dismissed. 12. As far as CMA(MD).No.934 of 2016 is concerned, the amount awarded by the Tribunal under different heads are just and proper, except a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- granted towards loss of amenities and interest at 9% per annum. Considering the entire aspect, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- granted towards future loss of amenities is reduced to Rs. 20,000/- and interest at the rate of 9% per annum is reduced to 7.5% per annum. In all other aspects, the amount awarded by the Tribunal is hereby confirmed. Accordingly, the amount awarded by the Tribunal is modified to a sum of Rs. 4,14,325/- together with interest at 7.5% per annum in the following manner:- S. No. Description Amount awarded by Tribunal Amount awarded by this Court Award confirmed or enhanced or granted 1. Disability 1,53,000.00 1,53,000.00 Confirmed 2. Loss of income 15,000.00 15,000.00 Confirmed 3. Transportation 16,000.00 16,000.00 Confirmed 5. Extra nourishment and attendant charges 10,000.00 10,000.00 Confirmed 6. Pain and suffering 75,000.00 75,000.00 Confirmed 7. Medical expenses 1,25,325.00 1,25,325.00 Confirmed 8. Loss of amenities 1,00,000.00 20,000.00 Reduced by Rs. 80,000/- Total 4,94,325.00 4,14,325.00 Reduced by Rs. 80,000/- 13. In the result, the CMA (MD) No. 934 of 2016 is partly allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 14. The Transport Corporation is directed to deposit the modified award amount together with interest, after deducting the amount already deposited if any, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire award amount, on filing proper application before the Tribunal.