227 of the Constitution of India.

4. This Court is of the considered view that when the Motor Vehicles Act , 1988, which is a special Act and the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is a creation whereof, specifically bars appeals in certain cases against the awards passed by learned Tribunal,u taking into consideration the pecuniary amount invoolved, then what cannot be done directly, cannot be alloweCd to be done indirectly, by permitting the aggrieved party to challenge the award under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

5. At this stage, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the reason as to why this petition has been filed is that there are other awards arising out of the same accident wherein the amount is in excess of Rs.1.00 Lac and if this award attains finality, then it would be difficult for the petitioner to assail other awards on merit, as the same will act as res-

judicata.

6. This Court is of the considered view that because there is a statutory bar under Section 173(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act , debarring the aggrieved party from assailing the award in terms of the amount involved therein, this bar cannot preclude the aggrieved party from assailing other a