AMIT RAWAL
Biju Mathew, S/o. Chacko Mathew – Appellant
Versus
Suraj Mon. K. Shaji, S/o. Shaji K S – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Inter alia alleges that the objection qua limitation is a mixed question of fact and law. The claim petition in respect of an accident occurred on 10.12.2021 could not have been rejected summarily by taking the aid of amendment caused in Section 166(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 substituted by Act 32 of 2019 made effective from 1.4.2022 as the said amendment would have a prospective effect. Otherwise with the stroke of the amendment the right available to the injured and the claimants of the deceased person would be taken away.
2. Prior to the amendment caused in the Motor Vehicles Act, the provisions dealing with no fault liability and entertainment of claim petitions under Section 92A and Section 110A of 1939 Act, was in existence. The aforementioned Act has been amended by Motor Vehicles Act in 1988 and the claim petition was to be filed within a period of six months. Prior to aforementioned amendment in 1994, no limitation to file claim petitions in respect of the accident occurred at any point of time. Legislature in its wisdom introduced the Act of 32 of 2019 effective from 1.4.2022 by bringing back the old provisions of 166(3) restricting the entertainment of t
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.