THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY MA.CMA.No.3321 of 2009 JUDGMENT: The appellant filed M.O.P.No.1586 of 1998 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-IV Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam, under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short ‘the Act’), claiming a sum of Rs.25,000/- as compensation under no fault liability. He pleaded that on 18.05.1998, when he was travelling in a bus bearing No.AP9 Z 3761 owned by respondent Nos.2 and 3, an accident has taken place on account of rash and negligent driving on the part of the first respondent. He is said to have received fracture injury to the right hand and left leg and initially treated at Government Hospital and thereafter, King George Hospital, Visakhapatnam, and undertaken treatment as an in-patient for five days. The Tribunal passed an order, dated 10.02.2000 awarding a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards no fault liability. However, an observation was made to the effect that the appellant shall not be entitled for any further compensation under Section 166 of the Act. The petitioner feels aggrieved by that observation. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents. The Parliament provided for payment of an amount of Rs.50,000/- for death and Rs.25,000/- for injuries towards no fault liability. If an application is filed under Section 140 of the Act for this purpose, the Tribunal is under obligation to grant that amount, if the occurrence of accident involving the concerned vehicle is not in dispute. Filing of application under Section 140 of the Act does not bar the right of the legal representatives of the deceased or the injured himself to claim further amount under Section 166 of the Act. It is a different matter that in case any amount is awarded under Section 166 of the Act, the amount awarded, under Section 140 of the Act shall be taken into account. The Tribunal was not at all justified in holding that the appellant is not entitled to claim compensation under Section 166 of the Act. Hence, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the observation of the Tribunal that the appellant is not entitled for any further compensation over and above Rs.25,000/-. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 14th SEPTEMBER, 2009. kvni