JUDGMENT : (Prayer: Appeal is filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgment and Decree dated 26.10.2010 made in M.C.O.P.No.146 of 2008 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Chief Judicial Magistrate) at Namakkal.) 1. The Insurance Company is the appellant herein challenging the Judgment and Decree dated 26.10.2010 made in M.C.O.P.No.146 of 2008 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Chief Judicial Magistrate) at Namakkal. 2. The first respondent herein/claimant has filed a claim petition in M.C.O.P.No.146 of 2008 before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Namakkal, alleging that on 21.10.2007 at about 4.00 p.m., while he was proceeding in a two wheeler bearing Registration No.TN-28-C-9089 near rain fed water tank in Ponvizha Nagar on the left side of the road, a car bearing Registration No.TN-09-1019, which was coming in the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner, hit against the claimant and caused the accident and as a result of which, the claimant sustained grievous injuries all over his body. For the injuries sustained by him, the injured/claimant has filed a claim petition claiming a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation. 3. Before the Tribunal, the injured/claimant examined himself as P.W.1 and Doctor was examined as P.W.2 and documents Exs.P.1 to P.7 were marked on the side of the injured/claimant. On the side of the respondents before the Tribunal, no witness was examined and Xerox copy of Ration Card was marked as Ex.R.1. 4. The Tribunal, based upon the oral evidence of the injured/P.W.1 coupled with Ex.P.1-FIR, Ex.P.2-Wound Certificate, Ex.P.3-Motor Vehicle Inspector’s inspection report, Ex.P.4-Charge Sheet, Ex.P.5-Xerox copy of judgment of the Criminal Court, Ex.P.6-X-ray and Ex.P.7-Disability Certificate, has held that FIR has been registered against the driver of the offending vehicle viz., against the driver of the second respondent herein and the driver also has pleaded guilty and paid the fine amount as could be seen from Ex.P.5-Xerox copy of the Judgment of the criminal Court and also held that the accident has taken place due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle and in the absence of any contra evidence, the said finding is hereby confirmed. 5. On the point of quantum, both the parties were heard. 6. 5. On the point of quantum, both the parties were heard. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/insurance company would contend that for the injuries said to have been sustained by P.W.1, there is no positive evidence much less adoption of the multiplier method is totally unwarranted and hence, the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal is exorbitant. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the first respondent/claimant made his submissions in support of the judgment of the Tribunal and relied upon the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court reported in 2010 (2) TN MAC 581 SC [Rajkumar Vs. Ajaykumar & another]. 8. P.W.2-Dr.Sivalingam had issued Ex.P.7-Permanent Disability Certificate stating as follows:- He is suffering from weakness, wastings, deformity with painful restriction of right Knee, leg, Ankle and Foot movements due to malunited fracture Tibia and Fibila right leg sustained injuries due to RTA at about 32 months ago. He underwent Orthopedic line of treatment. I have not treated the patient. 9. As per Ex.P.7-Permenant Disability Certificate, P.W.2-Doctor has fixed the disability suffered by the claimant at 40% and the Tribunal also has accepted the same. After going through the answer elicited in the cross-examination of P.W.2, it is seen that there is no positive evidence available on record to show that P.W.1 has sustained functional disability to the extent of 40% as fixed by the Tribunal. It remains to be stated that even as per the evidence of P.W.2 in the cross-examination and as per Ex.P.7-disability certificate, P.W.1/injured has underwent Orthopedic line of treatment and there is no shortening of leg or loosening of muscle. When such being the case, I find that the finding rendered by the Tribunal is without any legal basis and the same is hereby vacated. However, the disability fixed by P.W.2-Doctor at 40% is treated as partial permanent disability and hence, this Court awards a sum of Rs.60,000/- by fixing a sum of Rs.1,500/- per percentage of disability. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards pain and sufferings and the same is hereby enhanced to Rs.25,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards extra nourishment and a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards transportation charges and the same are hereby confirmed. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards attender charges and hence, this Court awards a sum of Rs.10,000/- under the said head. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards extra nourishment and a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards transportation charges and the same are hereby confirmed. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards attender charges and hence, this Court awards a sum of Rs.10,000/- under the said head. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards loss of amenities and hence, this Court awards a sum of Rs.15,000/- under the said head. Further, under the head of loss of income during the period of treatment for two months, this Court awards a sum of Rs.9,000/-. In all, the first respondent herein/claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,44,000/- as total compensation. 9. Accordingly, the award of the Tribunal stands reduced as follows:- Sl. No. Head Amount awarded by the Tribunal Amount granted by this Court 1. Permanent disability Rs.3,45,600/- Rs. 60,000/- 2. Pain and Sufferings Rs. 20,000/- Rs. 25,000/- 3. Extra Nourishment Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/- 4. Transportation charges Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 10,000/- 5. Attender charges - Rs. 10,000/- 6. Loss of Amenities - Rs. 15,000/- 7. Loss of income during the period of treatment for two months - Rs. 9,000/- Total Rs. 3,90,600/- Rs. 1,44,000/- 10. In the result, I. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed reducing the compensation from Rs.3,90,600/- to Rs.1,44,000/-. II. The interest granted by the Tribunal at 7.5% stands confirmed. III. The appellant-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the modified award amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, less the amount already deposited, if any. IV. On such deposit being made, the first respondent herein/claimant is permitted to withdraw the modified award amount along with interest and costs, less the amount already withdrawn, if any. V. As this Court has reduced the compensation amount from Rs.3,90,600/- to Rs.1,44,000/-, the appellant/insurance company is permitted to withdraw the excess amount, lying in the credit of M.C.O.P.No.146 of 2008. VI. There shall be no order as to costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed.