RAFIQ, J.—This appeal seeks to challenge the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Beawar dated 30.07.2005 in so far as the quantum of compensation is concerned. The appeal has been filed by the claimant who is seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. Shri Anshul Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant has argued that appellant was aged 23 years. He sustained fracture of femer bone. Although, it is true that disability certificate was not produced but nevertheless the Court has not awarded any amount whatsoever on the head of disability yet simply awarded a sum of Rs.5,000 for fracture. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that for fracture of femer bone, normally 10% is accepted as disability. The appellant being an illiterate person could not had the proper legal advice to get himself medically examined and obtained the disability certificate. The Tribunal ought to have awarded certain amount on the head of permanent disability also because the petitioner remained hospitalised for 20 days at Ajmer. The Tribunal has granted him Rs.4,150 for actual medical expenses, Rs.3,000 for pain and agony, Rs.7,800 for hospitalisation of 20 days. Thus, the total award of Rs.20,000 was passed which is far less than claimed. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent-insurance company opposed the appeal and submitted that the appellant failed to prove the permanent disability. The Tribunal was not under obligation to still award any amount under permanent disability. The Tribunal has rightly awarded a sum of Rs.4,150/- for medical expenses because no proof of the claimed expenses of Rs.20,000 was produced. The Tribunal has additional granted sum of Rs.5,000 for the fracture and Rs.3,000 for pain and suffering and Rs.7,800 for hospitalisation of 26 days. Therefore, award of Rs.20,000 is just and reasonable compensation. 5. On hearing learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned award, I find that appellant though could not produce permanent disability certificate but nevertheless it is proved that he has sustained fracture of femer bone for which normally 10% permanent disability is assessed. The appellant remained hospitalised in Jawahar Lal Nehru Hospital from 16.10.2001 to 10.11.2001 i.e. for 26 days. He was subjected to surgery on 30.10.2001. Not awarding him anything for permanent disability would not be justifiable. The award is somewhat on lower side. This Court proceeded to assess compensation on his monthly income of Rs.2,000 in the year 2001 when the accident took place. He was subjected to surgery on 30.10.2001. Not awarding him anything for permanent disability would not be justifiable. The award is somewhat on lower side. This Court proceeded to assess compensation on his monthly income of Rs.2,000 in the year 2001 when the accident took place. On that basis if the loss of disability is accepted at 10%, the loss of earning capacity would come to Rs.200 per month and Rs.2,400 per year. If the multiplier of 18 is applied thereon, the amount would come to Rs.43,200. A further amount of Rs.1,800 is added for pain and suff-ering because the amount of Rs.3,000 for pain and suffering appears to be somewhat on lower side, thus a sum of Rs.45,000 deserves to be additionally awarded over and above the amount of Rs.20,000 and the total compensation is enhanced from Rs.20,000 to Rs.65,000. The appellant is also entitled to interest @ 6% per annum on the enhanced amount of compensation from the date of filing of claim petition. The appeal is accordingly allowed.