PATNA HIGH COURT
B.C.Basak and S.N.Mishra JJ.
Ramesh Singh
Versus
Chinta Devi
Appeals from Original Order No. 252 of 1992 ; 75 of 1992 ; 232 of 1992 ; 233 of 1992 ; 234 of 1992 ; 235 of 1992 ;
Decided On : OCTOBER 11, 1993
B.C.BASAK-, J.
1. These series of Miscellaneous Appeals involve a common question of law relating to the interpretation of some of the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1939 Act), the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 1988 Act) and S. 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 (hereinafter referred to as the 1897 Act).
2. The relevant provisions of the 1939 Act relating to appeals are as follows:
Sec. 110D. "Appeals - (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-sec. (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 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 appeal is less than two thousand rupees."
3. The relevant provisions of the 1988 Act are as follows:
Sec. 173. Appeals- "(1) Subject to the provisions of sub-sec. (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 per cent 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." Sec. 217. Repeal and savings.- "(1)The Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (4 of 1939) and any law corresponding to that Act in force in any State immediately before the commencement of this Act in that State (hereafter in -this section referred to as the repealed enactments) are hereby repealed. (2) Notwithstanding the repeal by sub-sec. (1) of the repealed enactments.- . (a) any notification, rule, regulation, order or notice issued, or any appointment or declaration made or exemption granted, or any confiscation made or any penalty or fine imposed, any forfeiture, cancellation or any other thing done, or any other action taken under the repealed enactments, and in force immediately before such commencement shall, so far as it is not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, be deemed to have been issued, made, granted, done or taken under the corresponding provision of this Act; (b) any certificate of fitness or registration or licence or permit issued or granted under the repealed enactments shall continue to have effect after such commencements under the same conditions and for the same period as if this Act had not been passed; (c) any document referring to any of the repealed enactments or the provisions thereof, shall be construed as referring to this Act or to the corresponding provision of this Act; (d) the assignment of distinguishing marks by the registering authority and the manner of display on motor vehicles in accordance with the provision of the repealed enactments shall, after the commencement of this Act, continue to remain in force until a notification under Sub-sec. (6) of S. 41 of this Act is issued; (e) any scheme made u/s. 68C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (4 of 1939) or under the corresponding law, if any, in force in any State and pending immediately before the commencement of this Act shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of S.100 of this Act; (f) the permits issued under sub-sec. (1-A) of S. 68F of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 , (4 of 1939), or under the corresponding provision,
A. A. Haja Muniuddin V/s. Indian Railways
A.A. Calton V/s. Director Of Education
Concord Of India Insurance Co. Ltd. V/s. Nirmala Devi
Delhi Cloth And General Mills V/s. Income-tax Commissioner New Delhi
Ganpat Rai V/s. Agarwal Chamber Of Commerce Ltd.
Garikapati Veerava V/s. N. Subhiah Choudhary
Gurucharan Singh Baldev Singh V/s. Yashwant Singh
H.K.Dada (India) Ltd. V/s. State Of M. P.
Mithilesh Kumari V/s. Prem Behari Khare
Mst. Rafiquennessa V/s. Lal Bahadur Chetri
N.G. Mitra V/s. State Of Bihar
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Haldwani V/s. Dhanram Singh
State Of Bombay V/s. M:s. S.C. Films Exchange
Vitthalbhai V/s. Commissioner Of Sales Tax
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.