IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 2951 of 2009()
1. ARUN SANKARA, AGED 29 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. A.R. SULAIMAN, S/O. KUNJUMON,AMBALLATH
... Respondent
2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
For Petitioner :SRI.S.M.UNNIKRISHNAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :18/12/2009
O R D E R
P.R. RAMAN &
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JJ.
= = = = = = = = = = = = == == = = =
M.A.C.A. NO. 2951 OF 2009
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
DATED THIS, THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2009.
J U D G M E N T
Raman, J.
Appellant is the claimant/injured. He preferred a claim under
Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation. The
Tribunal awarded compensation under different heads in terms of
Schedule II to Section 163-A of the Act. The grievance raised in this
appeal is against the inadequacy of the compensation awarded towards
medical expenses. Only an amount of Rs. 15,000/- is granted.
According to the appellant, he has spent more amount than Rs. 15,000/-.
The appellant contends that as per item 4(ii) of Schedule-II the
restriction is only that more than Rs. 15,000/- can not be awarded at one
time. In other words, according to him, if he claims more amounts than
Rs. 15,000/- on different spells he is entitled to such amounts. We are
unable to agree. The provisions contained in Section 163A enables the
party to claim compensation under the structured formula without
proving negligence. One having opted to file a petition under Section
MACA 2951/2009 2
163A and not under Section 166 of the Act, he is bound by the restrictions
contained therein and can not enlarge its scope to claim more than what is
stipulated. Further, the petitioner himself did not mount the box. No other
evidence is adduced. In the absence of any such materials produced, we do
not find anything on the merit also.
Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.
P.R. RAMAN,
(JUDGE)
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
(JUDGE)
KNC/-