IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 19.12. 2008 CORAM:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. SUDHAKAR C.M.A.No.4020 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2008 The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Kancheepuram .. Appellant/Respondent Vs. Minor Philo Meena rep. by her father Kumar .. Respondent/Petitioner Appeal filed under Section 173 of the M.V.Act against the award and decree dated 28.09.2007 made in M.C.O.P No.174 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Sub Court) Maduranthagam. . For Appellant : Mrs.B.Vijayalakshmi For respondent : . . . J U D G M E N T The State Transport Corporation has filed this appeal challenging the award dated dated 28.09.2007 made in M.C.O.P No.174 of 2007 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (Sub Court) Maduranthagam. 2. It is a case of injury. The accident in this case happened on 30.07.2005. The minor injured claimant Philomeena, aged about 13 years, studying in 8th standard was travelling in the appellant Transport Corporation bus. The driver drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and the vehicle capsized in a pit. As a result, the minor girl suffered injuries on the left thigh and all over the body. She was treated at Madurantagam Government hospital for four days and then in a private hospital. She filed a claim for compensation in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. In support of the claim, the father of the injured claimant was examined as P.W.1. Several other students, who were also travelling in the bus were injured and they also filed claim petition and the Tribunal passed an award in common. The parents of other minor claimants were examined as P.W.2, P.W.3 and P.W.4. Documents were marked as Exs.P.1 to P.14. The Assistant Engineer in the appellant Transport Corporation was examined as R.W.1. No documentary evidence was let in on behalf of the appellant/respondent before the Tribunal. 4. The finding of negligence on the part of the driver of the bus and the liability fixed on the Transport Corporation appellant to compensate the claimant is not disputed. Accordingly, the said finding is confirmed. 5.The only plea is on the quantum of compensation. The Tribunal considering the age of the injured claimant, nature of injuries, and period of hospitalisation, granted Rs.30,000/- as compensation. Though the Tribunal has not given the break up for the compensation, the same can be adjusted on the following heads. The claimant will be entitled to compensation for pain and suffering, extra nourishment, attendant charges and transport expenses. Considering the young age of the injured claimant, she also requires medical treatment by way of physiotherapy till she recovers fully for going to the school. The very nature of accident is very gruesome as the bus capsized in a pit. Therefore, there will be mental shock to the young child. Considering all these aspects, the compensation granted by the Tribunal is just and reasonable. It does not require any reduction or modification so also the interest granted at 7.5% , since the accident in this case happened in the year 2005 and the award was passed in the year 2007. 6. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. Learned counsel for the appellant seeks eight weeks' time to deposit the entire amount and is granted. On such deposit, the claimant is permitted to withdraw the amount as per the order of the Tribunal. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar ra https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sub Court, Maduranthagam. 1 CC To Mrs.B.Vijayalakshmi, Advocate, SR NO.71463 CMA No. 4020 of 2008 mrd(co) pmk/12.2.2009 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/