The mandatory deposit requirement under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is a condition precedent for the High Court to judicially consider an appeal.

R.R. Yadav, J.-The instant Misc. Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been filed against the Award dated 30-9-1993 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chum in

M. A.C.T. Case No. 54/93, whereby the learned tribunal has awarded compensation to the respondent-claimants of Rupees 6,26,000/-.

2. The aforesaid appeal was presented on 27-1-94 within limitation and now after presentation, the office of the Registry vide its order dated 10-2-94 posted the afore-mentioned appeal for admission and for disposal of the stay application in utter ignorance of the provisions of Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The aforesaid Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is reproduced below in extenso :-

Section --173. Appeals:

(1) Subject to the provisions of Sub-section (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 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.”

3. It is true that the appeal lies against an award under the aforesaid Section, which before amendment, used to be filed under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 where there was no provision for making a deposit upon filing of an appeal in the High Court.

4. Now first proviso of Sub-section (1) of Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 makes a specific provision for such deposits where an appeal is filed by a person aggrieved from an Award by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, who is required to pay any amount under the Award, the appeal will not be entertained by the High Court unless the appellant has deposited:-

.(a) a sum of Rs. 25,000/-or

.(b) 50% of the amount awarded against the appellant, whichever is less.

5. Thedictionary meaning of word “entertain” means either “to deal with or admits to consideration”. The question, therefore, is at what stage can the appeal be said to be entertained for the purpose of admission and disposal of the stay application within the meaning of proviso of the aforesaid Section, which clearly provides that appeal will not be entertained by the High Court unless the appellant has deposited the requisite amount mentioned in the said Section.

6. Numerous cases exist in Law Reports where the word “Entertained” or similar cognate expressions have been interpreted by the Courts. If the legislature intended that the word “file” or “receive” was to be used, there was no difficulty of using those words. In some of the Statutes, such expressions have in fact been used, e.g. under Order 41, Rule 1, CPC it is stated that a memorandum shall not be filed or presented unless it is accompanied etc. Similarly, in Section 17 of the Small Cause Courts Act, 1870 (Act No. VII of 1870), the expression is “at the time of presenting the application”. Thus, it would appear from this that the legislature was not at a loss for words if it has wanted to express itself by using any phraseology. The legislature has used the word “Entertain” and it must be accepted that it has been used advisedly.

7. The expression “Entertain” is explained by a Division Bench of Allahabad High Court as denoting the point of time at which an application to set aside the sale is heard by the Court. The expression “Entertain” does not mean same-thing as filing of the application. The aforesaid view was expressed by the Alla