Anjani Kumar Mishra, J. - (1.) Heard Sri V.C. Dixit for the revisionist. The instant revision is directed against the award dated 1.3.1996, passed in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 7/1993.
(2.) Although an award passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal is appealable , under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, but sub-section 2 thereof provides that no appeal shall lie against an award of the Claims Tribunal where the amount in dispute is less than Rs. 10,000/-. From the above referred sub-Section 2, it is clear that the legislature in its wisdom, thought it, fit not to provide remedy of an appeal in matters where the dispute involved was for an amount less than Rs. 10,000/-. The award of the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal, impugned in the revision is for a sum of Rs. 3000/- only and since it is not appealable, in view of Section 173 (2) of the Act, the instant revision has been filed by the Insurance Company.
(3.) By filing these revision, before the High Court the revisionist is trying to avail a remedy indirectly, which remedy is not available to it directly under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act. This, in my considered opinion, cannot be permitted. Where challenge to an order is not permissible directly, the same cannot be entertained, indirectly.;