Honble SINGH, J.–Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the respondents nos. 1, 2 & 3.

(2). This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 20.1.1997 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Udaipur in claim case no. 216/95 filed under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

(3). The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the learned Tribunal was not justified in giving the impugned judgment as the application under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was not maintainable. The ground on which the above submission is made is that Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was added by an amendment which came into force on 14.11.1994 whereas the accident resulting in the death of Jagdish occurred on 6.6.1994.

(4). The learned counsel for the respondents-claimants has supported the impugned judgment passed by the learned Tribunal and prayed for dismissal of this appeal.

(5). It appears that an application under Section 163 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was filed by Shri Mehtab Bai, Ramesh and Sushri Sita (respondents nos. 1, 2 & 3), with the prayer that compensation to the tune of Rs. 6,88,500/- be awarded to them. According to

Click Here to Read the rest of this document