SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1993 Supreme(Pat) 450

S.N.MISHRA, B.C.BASAK
Ramesh Singh – Appellant
Versus
Chinta Devi – Respondent


Judgment

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








































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top