B. N. MALLIKARJUNA, J.

( 1 ) HEARD Mr. Rajasekhar, learned counsel for the petitioner regarding office objection. The objection is that the revision under section 115 of Civil Procedure Code directed against the order of the Motor Accidents claims Tribunal is not maintainable in view of the decision of this court in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Thibbegowda, 2000 ACJ 438 (Karnataka ).

( 2 ) IN this revision, respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in M. V. C. No. 413 of 1995 on the file of the II Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and m. A. C. T. at Dharwad have called in question the legality and correctness of the order dated 6. 10. 1998 awarding compensation of Rs. 9,370 to the claimant. Respondent No. 1 herein is the claimant. In Thibbegowda's case, 2000 ACJ 438 (Karnataka), a learned single Judge of this court has held that a revision under section 115 of Civil Procedure Code against an order/award of the M. A. C. T. is not maintainable for the reason that Motor accidents Claims Tribunal is not a 'civil court' or 'court subordinate to High Court' for the purpose of section 115. In Noreen R. Srikantaiah v. L. Dasarath Ramaiah, 1985 acj 628 (Karnataka), Division Bench of this court while considering

Click Here to Read the rest of this document