IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 18TH DECEMBER 2009 / 27TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 MACA.No. 2951 of 2009() ----------------------- OP(MV).803/2004 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: --------------------------- ARUN SANKARA, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O. M.P. PRABHANKAR, 15/81, COURT ROAD, SULTANPET, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.S.M.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.U.BALAGANGADHARAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------- 1. A.R. SULAIMAN, S/O. KUNJUMON,AMBALLATH HOUSE, KANNIPPAYOOR P.O., CHUVANNOOR, THRISSUR. 2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE U BROTHERS BUILSINGS, GURUVAYOOR ROAD, KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 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/-