JUDGMENT R.D. Vyas, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award in Claim Case No. 92 of 1992 dated 31.1.1994 by the learned III Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ratlam, who was pleased to award an amount of Rs. 55,000/- with 12 per cent interest thereon. 2. The case of the appellant in short is that in an accident between the truck No. MBT 5934 and bus No. CPW 0747 she received injuries on head, face, jaws and right hand. She demanded Rs. 10,000/- for treatment, Rs. 10,000/- for pain, shock and suffering and Rs. 75,000/- for future disability. In all she demanded Rs. 95,000/-. 3. Mr. Patwa appearing for the appellant argued that looking to the injuries that the appellant has received, defacement and injury to the eye, can be said to be permanent disability. The appellant had examined Dr. Laad as AW 3, who has stated that he had examined the appellant and had given the certificate at P 10. He said in his evidence that the injury that the appellant has received could cause reduction in the eyesight. The medical certificate shows that right side of her face is depressed. Her right eye pupil was dilated and fixed. This is the certificate issued immediately after the accident. The certificate itself shows that it was due to the vehicular accident. In that view of the matter, the Tribunal held that the appellant was injured in an accident caused by both the vehicles which were negligently driven. 4. Looking to the quantum of compensation granted by the Tribunal, it is on the lower side. The minimum no fault liability should have been borne in mind by the Tribunal while granting compensation. Looking to the injuries received by the appellant in her face and near her eye causing reduction in eye sight, her claim ought to have been accepted. Looking to her age, the Tribunal ought to have granted at least Rs. 12,000/- more than what it has granted. This is an assessment based on no fault liability and also period of hospitalisation, unconsciousness and the defacement caused to her. 5. Looking to her age, being 13 and considering all possibilities, I deem it fit to allow a further claim of Rs. 12,000/- over and above what has been granted by the Tribunal, which would compensate the appellant. This additional amount of Rs. 5. Looking to her age, being 13 and considering all possibilities, I deem it fit to allow a further claim of Rs. 12,000/- over and above what has been granted by the Tribunal, which would compensate the appellant. This additional amount of Rs. 12,000/- will bear an interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of application till realisation. 6. The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent with proportionate costs. This amount will be borne by the respondents' vehicles equally. The costs of the appeal also be borne by the respondents' vehicles equally.