Appellant being the partyinperson, challenging the order dated 14-07-2016 made in MVC No. 5117/2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal" for short) rejecting the application filed by him under Section 140 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (‘the Act’ for brevity) seeking interim compensation on the principle of “No Fault Liability”.

2. The appellant filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Act seeking compensation for the injuries sustained in the accident, inter alia contending that on 03-10-2015, while he was proceeding as a pillion rider in a Bajaj Discover motorcycle, bearing Registration No.KA02/EZ5802 ridden by the first respondent herein, and while returning from Family Court to City Civil Court, the rider of the motorcycle dashed the motorcycle to the road-divider, due to that the claimant fell down from the motorcycle and sustained grievous injuries. Immediately after the accident, he was shifted to the Bowring and Lady Curzon Hospital, Bangalore wherein he took treatment as inpatient. In the accident he has sustained fracture of right arm, tenderness over mid 1/3rd of upper arm, tenderness over the right elbow. He has undergone operation with the implants on 13-10-2015 and discharged on 15-10-2015. As per the advice of the doctor, he had taken rest for a period of 4 months. He has spent more than Rs.30,000/- towards the treatment. He was a practicing advocate, in view of the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident, he has sustained huge loss. Hence sought for compensation of Rs.13,22,000/- . Along with the said claim petition, the claimant had also filed an application, invoking Section 140 of the Act seeking for interim compensation on the principle of No Fault Liability.

3. The respondents 2 and 3 filed objections to the claim petition. Respondent No.2 in the written statement admitted the occurrence of accident and injuries sustained by the claimant. As on the date of accident, the insurance policy was in force. The motorcycle was having package and comprehensive policy, it covers the risk of pillion rider also. Hence, the insurance company has to indemnify the insured and liable to compensate the claimant.

4. The insurance company in their written statement denied its liability and also contended that there was no accident occurred as claimed by the claimant and it was self-fall from the motorcycle on 03-10-2015. However, the complaint was lodged on 02-11-2015. While admitting in the hospital, the claimant has clearly mentioned that injury due to self-fall, hence the insurance company is not liable to compensate the claimant. Further, the injuries sustained by the claimant will not fall under Section 140 of the Act, the appellant cannot make an application under Section 140 seeking interim compensation. Hence, sought for dismissal of the application filed under Section 140 of the Act.

5. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal had taken up the application filed under Section 140 of the Act and framed necessary issues.

6. The Tribunal, after considering the arguments addressed by the parties, held that the claimant has sustained deformity of the right arm which does not come within the purview of Section 140 of the Act. As per Section 142 of the Act, in order to claim interim compensation, either death or permanent disablement has to be resulted from the accident arising out of use of the motor vehicle or motor vehicles. Section 142 deals with the permanent disablement. The injuries sustained by the claimant do not fall under any of the injuries as enumerated under Section 142 of the Act and accordingly dismissed the application filed under Section 140 of the Act, by its order dated 14-07-2016. Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has filed this appeal.

7. Sri. K.L. Vidyashankar, party-in-person contended that the order dated 14-07-2016 rejecting the application filed under Section 140 is erroneous in law and contr