JUDGMENT R.C. Lahoti, J. 1. This is a claimant's appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, seeking enhancement in the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gwalior. 2. The Claims Tribunal has found that on 10.5.1984 at about 12.45 p.m., the appellant was a passenger in a Tempo which was dashed against by a jeep owned by the respondent No. 1, allotted to respondent No. 2 arid driven by the respondent No. 3 at the material time. It was the rash and negligent driving of the driver which was the cause of the accident. The appellant was serving as a draftsman in M.P. P.W.D. and drawing Rs. 755/- per month by way of salary. She was aged 21. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 10,000/- for the medical expenses, Rs. 3,000/- for special diet, Rs. 2,000/- for mental pain and suffering, Rs. 7,500/- for loss of efficiency and Rs. 4,000/- for loss of future prospects. The total compensation of Rs. 26,500/- has been awarded payable by the respondent No. 1,2 and 3 with interest calculated at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from 26.7.1984, the date of the claim petition, till realisation. 3. It will be useful to notice the nature of injuries and the ordeal undergone by the claimant-appellant on account of the accident. 4. The statement of the appellant is fully corroborated by Dr. H.K.T. Razaq supported by the documents, Exhs.P-1 to P-12, believed by the Tribunal. Dr. Razaq was lecturer in Orthopaedics in the Medical College at Gwalior. The appellant's 1/3rd of left tibia and fibula were fractured. She remained admitted from 21.5.1984 to 12.6.1984 in the Female Orthopaedic Ward of the hospital. Throughout she was to remain under traction. While being discharged under plaster on 12.6.1984, she was advised to report back after a month. On 17.8.1984, on being X-rayed, delayed union of the fractured bones was detected. On 23.8.1984, she was again admitted in the hospital and had to undergo phemester bone grafting. On 24.8.1984, long pieces of bone from the iliac crest measuring approximately 3" in length and of full thickness had to be put around the site of the fracture. She was discharged on 13.9.1984, again under plaster. 5. On 27.11.1984, she was examined again because of local tenderness persisting. The fragments of bone were still mobile. Above knee cast was advised and applied. She was discharged on 13.9.1984, again under plaster. 5. On 27.11.1984, she was examined again because of local tenderness persisting. The fragments of bone were still mobile. Above knee cast was advised and applied. She was advised to report after a month. 6.On 9.2.1985, Dr. Razaq removed the above knee cast and found the tenderness still persisting P.T.B. cast for six weeks was advised and applied. On 22.4.1985, after examining the appellant Dr. Razaq advised her to start walking and resuming duties though remaining under P.T.B. cast. She did so by moving with extra support. 7. On 27.5.1985, the appellant's cast was removed and elastocrepe bandage was applied. On 12.2.1986, she had to be admitted in Medical College Hospital, Jabalpur, because of the pain persisting. She was operated on 14.2.1986. Refreshing of the anteriorsuperior iliac spine was done. She was discharged on 17.2.1986. Dr. Razaq examined the appellant in the Court on the date of statement, that is, 3.5.1990. She had pain over the left iliac crest, limiting her mobility. She had swelling over the left leg and foot. There was excessive tenderness over the scar of the operation and around it. Angular and rotational stress at the site of the fracture were causing pain. The ankle joint did not have free movement. The left tibia had a shortening by 1.5 cm. Dr. Razaq was of the opinion that some tenderness over the iliac crest and operative scar would continue to persist for indefinite period. 8. Thus, for a period of around two years, the appellant had to undergo treatment with confinement to bed for most of the period. Her physical efficiency has been seriously impaired. No doubt, she has been married during the pendency of the claim petition but it would be common sense to infer that her marriage prospects must not have remained what they could have been. 9. As to assessment of compensation in similar cases, the learned Counsel for the appellant cited a few decisions. In Narendra Pal Singh Rana v. Padamchand Jain , for fracture of tibia and fibula of left leg, having noticed that the claimant had not recovered fully from his disablement during the course of last six years, this Court enhanced the awarded amount of compensation from Rs. 27,000/- to Rs. 40,000/-. 10. In Narendra Pal Singh Rana v. Padamchand Jain , for fracture of tibia and fibula of left leg, having noticed that the claimant had not recovered fully from his disablement during the course of last six years, this Court enhanced the awarded amount of compensation from Rs. 27,000/- to Rs. 40,000/-. 10. In Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. Sughar Singh (1990) I MPWN 116, the claimant's both legs were fractured of which one had to be amputated. The claimant had remained under treatment for six months. An amount of Rs. 50,000/- was held to be an ideal amount of compensation. 11. In Bhagchand v. Kishanlal , the tibia and fibula of left leg of the claimant were fractured. The claimant had to undergo surgery. There was shortening of the leg by 11/2". The Tribunal had awarded Rs.7,750/- (Sic. Rs. 14,400/-) as compensation which was enhanced by this Court to Rs. 40,000/- and not beyond because the claimant had herself limited her claim to that amount. 12. Mansingh v. Surendra Kumar , is a Division Bench decision. There was fracture of both the legs and uprooting of two teeth. The extent of premanent disability was 40 per cent. The amount of compensation of Rs. 25,000/- awarded by the Tribunal was enhanced by this Court to Rs. 60,000/-. 13. Having discussed at the Bar with the learned Counsel for the parties and having kept in view the judicial trend, this Court is of the opinion that without particularising the different heads on which the Tribunal has awarded compensation, lump sum amount of Rs. 40,000/- would be an ideal figure of compensation which should be allowed to the claimant-appellant. 14. The appeal is partly allowed. In partial modification of the award of the Tribunal, it is directed that the figure of Rs. 40,000/- shall be substituted in place of Rs. 26,500/-awarded by the Tribunal. Order as to interest and costs before the Tribunal is maintained. The appellant shall also be entitled to costs quantified at Rs. 500/- of this appeal.