S. MANIKUMAR, J.

1. Being aggrieved by the finding, fixing negligence on the driver of the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation bus, bearing Registration No. TN 68 N 0328 and the quantum of compensation of Rs. 29,77,000/-, with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the date of claim, till deposit, awarded to the legal representatives of the deceased in M.C.O.P.No.2088 of 2013, dated 22.12.2014, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (IV Court of Small Causes), Chennai, the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation has filed this appeal.

2. Material on record and the impugned judgment shows that on 27.01.2013, about 12.30 Hours, when Mr. Damodharan, was riding a two wheeler, bearing Registration No. TN 19 H 4694, at ECR, Hajjiya Nagar, Pudupattinam, a Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation bus, bearing Registration No. TN 68 N 0328, driven by its driver, in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the two-wheeler, causing fatal injuries and he died on the same day. In this regard, a case in Cr.No.17 of 2013, has been registered against the driver of the bus, on the file of Kalpakkam Police Station, Kancheepuram District. Contending inter-alia that the deceased was working as a Plumber in Satyabama University and earned Rs. 15,000/- per month, wife and parents, claimed compensation of Rs. 40,00,000/-.

3. The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Kumbakonam, in its counter affidavit, has denied the manner of accident. They submitted that the accident occurred only due to rash and negligent act of the rider of the Motorcyclist. Hence, they submitted that owner and insurer of the two-wheeler ought to have been impleaded as party respondents in the claim petition and for the above said reasons, disputed negligence and consequently, their liability to pay compensation. Without prejudice to the above, the Corporation has disputed the age, avocation and income of the deceased and the compensation claimed under various heads.

4. Before the Claims Tribunal, wife examined herself as PW.1 and reiterated the averments made in the claim petition. PW.2 is stated to have witnessed the accident. PW.3, Mr. Nagaraj, is stated to be the Manager in Sathyabama University, under whom, the deceased was claimed to have worked as Plumber. Documents, Ex.P1-FIR, Ex.P2-Postmortem Certificate, Ex.P3-Charge Sheet, Ex.P4-Sketch, Ex.P5-Legal Heir Certificate, Ex.P6-Pay Slip, Ex.P7-Identity Card, Ex.P8-Diploma Certificate, Ex.P9-Educational Qualification Certificate, Ex.P10-Sports Certificate, Ex.P11-Original employment office registration card, Ex.P12-Service Certificate and Ex.P13-Identity Card of PW.2, have been marked, on behalf of the respondents/claimants. RW.1, is the driver of the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation bus. No document has been marked.

5. Evaluating the pleadings and evidence, the Claims Tribunal, fixed negligence on the driver of the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation bus, bearing Registration No. TN 68 N 0328 and computed the overall compensation as Rs. 29,77,000/-, with interest, at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the date of claim, till realisation, as hereunder:

6. Assailing the correctness of the judgment, Mr. D. Venkatachalam, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Transport Corporation submitted that the Claims Tribunal ought not to have considered the evidence of PW.1, wife of the deceased, an interested witness. He further submitted that the evidence of PW.2, has not been corroborated by any other witness. According to him, mere registration of crime, against the driver of the Transport Corporation bus, is not sufficient to hold him negligent.

7. It is also t