ORDER :

(Prayer: Civil Revision Case is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to set aside the Docket order dated 02.01.2023 passed in MCOP.No.1811 of 2022 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Principal District Court, Nagercoil and direct the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Principal District Court, Nagercoil to number the MCOP petition and take it on its file and pass orders.)

1. The above revision petition has been filed challenging an order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagercoil returning a claim petition on the ground that it is time barred in view of the Motor Vehicles (Amendment Act) 2019.

2. The revision petitioner is the claimant and he had filed the said claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagercoil under Section 166/140 of Motor Vehicle Act 1988 claiming compensation for the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident that took place on 11.12.2020. The said claim petition has been presented before the Tribunal on 20.12.2022. As per endorsement, the Claims Tribunal had returned the said claim petition on the ground that as per Motor Vehicles (Amendment Act) 2019, Section 166 (3) has been introduced and no application for compensation can be entertained unless it is made within a period of 6 months from the date of occurrence of the accident. This order is under challenge in the present revision petition.

3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the accident had taken place on 11.12.2020. Therefore on the date when cause of action arose, there was no limitation for filing a claim petition seeking compensation for the death/injuries sustained in a motor accident. The Motor Vehicle Act 1988 was amended by way of Motor Vehicles (Amendment Act 2019) which came into force on 01.04.2022. The claim petition has been presented on 20.12.2022.

4. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the law that was prevailing on the date of cause of action alone should be taken into consideration and the claim petition cannot be considered to be barred by limitation based upon the amendment that is subsequent to the arising of cause of action. Therefore, the petitioner sought to set aside the order and direct the Claims Tribunal to number the claim petition.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made on the side of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

6. Before considering the effect of amendment, introducing period of limitation, let us consider the history of the legislation. In the Motor Vehicles Act 1939, Section 110(A)(3) barred the Courts from entertaining an application for compensation unless the said application is made within a period of 6 months from the date of occurrence of the accident. However, the Claims Tribunal was empowered to condone the delay, if sufficient cause is made out. The said Motor Vehicles Act 1939 was repealed with effect from 01.07.1989 and the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 came into force. Under 1988 Act, Section 166(3) directed the Court, not to entertain any application unless it is made within 6 months from the date of occurrence of the accident. However, the Tribunal were empowered to condone the delay for further period of 6 months (the application should be filed within a period of 12 months from the date of accident) if it is satisfied that the applicants was prevented by sufficient cause.

7. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was again amended by way of Act 53 of 1994 with effect from 14.11.1994. The limitation that was prescribed for filing a claim petition was deleted by the said amendment. Now again by way of Act 32 of 2019, limitation of 6 months has been reintroduced with effect from 01.04.2022 onwards for filing a claim petition. However, the Tribunal has not been empowered to condone the delay if the claim petition has been filed beyond a period of 6 months from the date of occurrence of accident.

8. The issue now that arises for consideration is that when an amendment is brought into force, i