1. This Civil First Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 26.03.2012 passed by the Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jammu in Claim Petition titled as Muskaan Gupta v. Reliance and another, in File No. 228/C, whereby award of Rs.65,000 came to be awarded in favour of the claimant-appellant with interest @ 7.5. p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization. The appellant-claimant has filed the instant appeal for enhancement of compensation on the grounds taken in the memo of the appeal (for short, impugned award). Brief facts: 2. On 16.07.2008 at about 6.15 p.m. when appellant-claimant was travelling on a motorcycle bearing No.JK02Q-6318 near Domana, the said motorcycle was hit by a vehicle bearing No.JMU-H-764 (hereinafter referred to as offending vehicle) that was being driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver respondent No.1. The accident is alleged to have caused grievous injuries to appellant-claimant. She filed claim petition for grant of compensation to the tune of Rs.18.50 lacs as per the break-ups given in the claim petition. 3. The respondents were put to notice. Owner-cum driver (respondent No.1) denied the occurrence but has admitted the ownership of the offending vehicle. Insurer contested the claim petition by pleading that driver of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid and effective driving license at the time of accident and admitted the currency of policy of insurance of offending vehicle with it covering the period of accident. 4. Out of the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed:- "1."Whether an accident occurred on 16.07.2008 near Domana by the rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle No. JMU-H-764 Maruti Wagon-R in the hands of erring driver as a result of which petitioners Muskan Gupta, Pinky Gupta and Sanjay Gupta suffered grievous injuries ? OPP 2. If issue No.1 is proved in affirmative, whether petitioners are entitled to the compensation in each claim petition, if so to what amount and from whom? OPP. 3. Whether driver of offending vehicle at the time of accident was not holiding valid and effective driving license if so what is its effect? OPR-1. 4. Relief. OPP." 5. The petitioner examined himself along with other witnesses and also placed on record some documents to substantiate her claim. 6. OPP. 3. Whether driver of offending vehicle at the time of accident was not holiding valid and effective driving license if so what is its effect? OPR-1. 4. Relief. OPP." 5. The petitioner examined himself along with other witnesses and also placed on record some documents to substantiate her claim. 6. Insurer has not led any evidence in rebuttal, thus, the evidence led by the claimant has remained un-rebutted. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant-claimant argued that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on lower side. There is no dispute with regard to findings returned by the Tribunal on issues 1 and 3. Only dispute is with regard to 'adequacy of compensation'. In view of the findings returned and record produced, I am of the considered view that issues 1 and 3 have rightly been decided by the Tribunal in favour of the appellant-claimant and, accordingly, the same are upheld. 8. Only question now for consideration is as to whether the amount of compensation is adequate or otherwise. 9. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.65,000/- only 'for pain and sufferings' and 'medical expenses' which is too meagre keeping in view the disability suffered and suffering undergone by the appellant-claimant. 10. The appellant has under gone treatment on account of fracture of lower end of femur and was operated with intramedullary fixation and nailing. Initially, the appellant was admitted in Govt. Medical College, Jammu and thereafter shifted to Amandeep Hospital, Amritsar and was hospitalised from 21.07.2008 and discharged on 26.07.2008. She filed claim petition claiming Rs.18.50 lacs as compensation whereas Tribunal has awarded only Rs.65,000/- which is too meagre. The claimant has placed on file medical bills for Rs.55,000/- and has also undergone further operations and treatment. 11. In the given circumstances, I deem it proper that by applying guess work, the appellant-claimant is entitled, at least, Rs.75,000/- under the head' for pain and sufferings' and also entitled to Rs.55,000/-, at least, under the head "medical expenses". 12. While going though the medical evidence and bills produced and other documents on record, the claimant is held entitled to compensation as under:- 1. For pain and sufferings : Rs. 75,000/- 2. Medical expenses : Rs. 55,000/- 13. Accordingly, an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- (including interim compensation already granted) is awarded as compensation in favour of the appellant-claimant. 12. While going though the medical evidence and bills produced and other documents on record, the claimant is held entitled to compensation as under:- 1. For pain and sufferings : Rs. 75,000/- 2. Medical expenses : Rs. 55,000/- 13. Accordingly, an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- (including interim compensation already granted) is awarded as compensation in favour of the appellant-claimant. The awarded sum shall carry interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its realization. Accordingly, appeal is allowed and award is enhanced to the extent as indicated above. 14. The amount of compensation deposited be released in favour of the appellant-claimant after her proper identification and verification strictly in terms of the impugned award. The Court fee shall be the first charge. The Insurer-respondent to deposit balance amount within two months from today. 15. Registry to send down the records along with a copy of this order. 16. Disposed of along with connected CMA(s), if any.