- (1.)THE Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the Transport Corporation against the Judgment and Decree dated 3.1.2007 made in MCOP No.624 of 1998 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Principal Subordinate Judge),Tiruvannamalai.
(2.)BACKGROUND facts in a nutshell are as follows: - The respondent / claimant was injured in a motor accident on 03.03.1998 at about 5.00 p.m. He was walking along the left side in the Tiruvannamalai -Sathanoor Dam Road near Veeranam Village Muniappankoil. At that time, a bus belonging to the appellant / Transport Corporation, came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the claimant. Due to the accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries. The claimant claimed a sum of Rs.1,00,000/ - as compensation before the Tribunal. The appellant / Transport Corporation resisted the claim. On pleadings, the following issues were framed by the Tribunal: - a) Whether the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus belonging to the appellant / Transport Corporation or not? b) Whether the claimant is entitled for any compensation? If so, what is the amount and from whom? 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 bus belonging to the appellant / Transport Corporation and awarded a compensation of Rs.76,250/ - with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition. The details of the compensation are as under: -
Rupees Loss of income 56,250/ - Pain and suffering 5,000/ - Medical expenses 5,000/ - Special damages 10,000/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total.. 76,250/ - ==========
Aggrieved by the award, the Transport Corporation has filed the present appeal.
Learned counsel appearing for the Transport Corporation questioned only the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and vehemently contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is excessive and exorbitant, without basis and justification, and that therefore, the order passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law and the same has to be set aside.

(3.)HEARD the counsel. On the side of the claimant, witnesses P.W.1 and P.W.2 were examined and documents Ex.P1 to Ex.P6 were marked. On the side of the Transport Corporation, one Purushothaman, driver of the bus, was examined as R.W.1 and no documents were marked. P.W.1 is the father of the claimant. P.W.2 is Dr.Raveendran. Ex.P1 is the copy of First Information Report. Ex.P2 is the copy of Motor Vehicle Inspection Report. Ex.P3 is the copy of the Accident Register. Ex.P4 are the photographs of the claimant. Ex.P5 is the Permanent Disability Certificate. Ex.P6 is the X -ray. After considering the above oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal had given a categorical finding that the accident had occurred only due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus belonging to the appellant / Transport Corporation. The finding of the Tribunal is based on valid materials and evidence.