The Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff') filed Civil Suit No.2448 of 1968 against the Union of India owning and representing the Western Railway (hereinafter referred to as the defendant No.1) and another in the Court of Small Causes at Ahraedabad for recovering a sum of Rs.1344.34 p. on account of damage suffered by the plaintiff's vehicle allegedly due to the gross and negligent driving by the defendant No.2 of a vehicle belonging to the defendant No.1. The suit was instituted by the plaintiff on 25th June 1968. In 1969 the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 was amended by the Parliament. Inter alia, the amending statute - The Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 1969 - has amended Section 110 which deals with the question of jurisdiction of the Claims Tribunals. Relying upon this amendment the defendant No.1 has contended that the Court of Small Causes at Ahmedabad has no jurisdiction to proceed with the suit.

2. The learned Trial Judge raised the preliminary issue in that behalf and by his order dated 17th February 1971 he held that the Court of Small Causes at Ahmedabad had jurisdiction to proceed with the suit and directed accordingly.

3. It is that order recorded by the learned Trial Judge on the aforesaid preliminary issue which is called in question by the defendants in this Civil Revision Application.

4. Before I deal with the contentention raised by Mr. Bhatt before me it is necessary to note a few undisputed facts. The suit was instituted in the Court of Small Causes on 25th June 1968. The Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 1969 by which Section 110 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 was amended came into force sometime after 29th December 1969. The notification reconstituting the Claims Tribunals for the City of Ahmedabad in terms of the amended Section 110 was published by the State Government on 24th December 1970. The claim which the plaintiff has made against the defendants is in respect of the damage caused to its vehicle in a collision that took place between its vehicle and the vehicle belonging to the defendant No.1 and driven by the defendant No.2. In 1968 when the suit was filed by the plaintiff sub-section (1) of S.110 which is material for the present purpose provided as follows.

"(1) A State Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, constitute one or more Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals (hereinafter referred to as Claims Tribunals) for such area as may be specified in the notification for the purpose of adjudicating upon claims for compensation in respect of accidents involving the death of, or bodily injury to persons arising out of the use of motor vehicles."

A bare perusal of sub-section (1) of Section 110 makes it clear beyond doubt that the jurisdiction which the Claims Tribunals had under the unamended Section 110 was in respect of claims arising out of deaths or bodily injuries caused by accidents by motor vehicles. Their jurisdiction did not extend to any claim for compensation arising out of any other cause such as damage to the property. In the instant case, since the plaintiff had been claiming damages for the damage caused to its motor vehicle, the Claims Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain any such claim in 1968. The suit filed by the plaintiff against the defendants in the Court of Small Causes at Ahmedabad in 1968 was, therefore, a validly instituted action. By Section 57 of the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 1969 the following words have been added to sub-section (1) of S.110.

"............... or damages to any property of a third party so arising, or both."

Reading sub-section (1) of S.110 as amended by Section 57 of Act No.56 of 1969 I find that the jurisdiction of the Claims Tribunal was by the said Act extended also to claims for compensation arising out of damage caused to any property of a third party. As stated above, the amending statute was published in the Gazette of India on 29th December 1969 and came into force ther