JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sojat in MACT Case No.31/2004 vide judgment and award dated 1.8.2007. 3. The only grievance of the appellant is that he has been awarded less compensation on account of four fractures which he suffered in the accident. According to learned counsel for the appellant, the Tribunal should have granted Rs.15000/- for each fracture and particularly in view of the fact that the cumulative effect of all fractures has its own effect. The appellant remained hospitalised. The appellant was of 22 years age and he was working in a shop and was getting Rs.5000/- per month. 4. According to the learned counsel for the claimant/ appellant, the interest has also been awarded too low. It is also submitted that interest might have been reduced by the Tribunal because of low interest rate but now the interest rates are high. It is also submitted that the Tribunal awarded Rs.500/- only as transportation expenses. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently submitted that the appellant has not suffered any permanent disability and, therefore, the Tribunal was right in awarding Rs.5000/- for each injury. In fact, this amount is also excessive because the appellant has not suffered any permanent disability. Award of interest is also just. 6. I considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the reasons given in the impugned award as well as the record. 7. It is clear from the facts which are not in dispute that the accident occurred on 27.7.2003 and the driver of the vehicle Ramesh was driving the vehicle rashly and negligently and caused accident resulting into injuries to the appellant and one Bhana Ram. The appellant has claimed compensation of Rs.26,00,000/-. 7. It is clear from the facts which are not in dispute that the accident occurred on 27.7.2003 and the driver of the vehicle Ramesh was driving the vehicle rashly and negligently and caused accident resulting into injuries to the appellant and one Bhana Ram. The appellant has claimed compensation of Rs.26,00,000/-. However, the tribunal awarded compensation to the appellant as under:- 1 lk/kkj.k pksVksa ds ,soy esa jkf'k 4 x 1000@& :i;s 4000@& 2 4 xaHkhj pksVksa ds ,sot esa {kfriwfrZ jkf'k 4 x 5000@& :i;s 20000@& 3 lkstr vLirky esa HkrhZ jgus ds nkSjku [kpZ gqbZ jkf'k& 1800@& 4 tks/kiqj HkrhZ lfgr bZykt gsrq nokbZ;ksa] tkaps] vkWizs'ku vkfn ij [kpZ dh x;h jkf'k%& 38161@& 5 ifjogu [kpZ ds :i esa {kfriwfrZ jkf'k 500@& 6 3 ekg rd tSj bZykt jgus ij vk; dh deh ds ,sot esa {kfriwfrZ 75@& x 90 fnu& 6750@& 71211@& 8. It is clear from the evidence on record that the appellant suffered in total 8 injuries. The appellant suffered one fracture in Ribs, one fracture in Scapula and one fracture in Maxilla and also suffered operation. The appellant remained in hospital from 28.7.2003 to 3.8.2003 and from 6.8.2003 to 8.8.2003 and then operation was conducted. To prove these facts, the appellant placed on record Ex/54 and Ex/55. There is one more fracture which is proved by Ex/53. The appellant took treatment in hospital at Sojat city as well as in the hospital at Jodhpur. The appellant had to incur total expenditure of Rs.30,161/- for his treatment. Therefore, it is clear that the appellant suffered number of injuries in the accident. 9. It is true that the appellant has not suffered any permanent disability because he did not suffer injury on the particular part of the body but looking to the fact that he suffered so many injuries, the cumulative effect of the injuries cannot be ignored. The award of compensation to the appellant on account of fractures on various parts of body at the rate of Rs. 5,000/- per injury is low in particular facts and circumstances of the case that he not only suffered injuries but he had to suffer operation also. 10. In view of the above reasons, taking into consideration all the facts, it would be just and proper to award Rs.10000/- for each of the fracture suffered by the appellant. 5,000/- per injury is low in particular facts and circumstances of the case that he not only suffered injuries but he had to suffer operation also. 10. In view of the above reasons, taking into consideration all the facts, it would be just and proper to award Rs.10000/- for each of the fracture suffered by the appellant. The appellant is entitled to Rs.40,000/- in place of Rs.20,000/- as awarded by the tribunal. Rest amount awarded is maintained. The interest at the rate of 6% per annum is liable to be increased to 7.5% which may be paid on the amount awarded by the tribunal from the date of award and on enhanced amount from the date of decision of this appeal. 11. Consequently, this appeal is partly allowed and the amount of claim is enhanced from Rs.71,211/- to Rs.91,211/- with interest at the rate mentioned above. *******