Judgment Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. 1. The present appeal has been filed by the driver of the offending vehicle. Along with this appeal, an application has been filed for granting exemption to the appellant from depositing of Rs. 25,000/- as envisaged under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The sole ground taken in this application for exemption is that the Insurance Company has already deposited the whole amount,of compensation as awarded by the Tribunal and therefore, there is no need to deposit the amount of Rs. 25,000/- while filing this appeal. I am afraid, the ground raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is against the express provisions of law. 2. It is well settled that right to appeal is a statutory right and the same can be availed only in accordance with the provisions of law. Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 reads as follows: "Appeals.- (1) Subject to the provisions of subsection (2) any person aggrieved by an award of a Claims Tribunal may, within ninety days from the date of the award, prefer an appeal to the High Court. Provided that no appeal by the person who is required to pay any amount in terms of such award shall be entertained by the High Court unless he has deposited with it twenty-five thousand rupees or fifty percent of the amount so awarded, whichever is less, in the manner directed by the High Court. Provided further that the High Court may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of ninety days, if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal in time. (2) No appeal shall lie against any award of a Claims Tribunal if the amount in dispute in the appeal is less than ten thousand rupees." 3. Since under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, it is prerequisite to deposit the amount of Rs.25,000/- or 50% of the amount awarded whichever is less, before filing the appeal on behalf of the driver/owner/insurer and the said amount having not been deposited, the application under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is liable to be rejected. 4. Ordered accordingly. Since the appellant has failed to deposit the amount as envisaged under law, thus, there is no properly constituted appeal before me. Hence, the present appeal is also dismissed. Appeal dismissed.