SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1984 Supreme(P&H) 668

PREM CHAND JAIN, S.S.KANG
Barkat Singh – Appellant
Versus
Hans Raj Pandit, Driver – Respondent


Judgment

SUKHDEV SINGH KANG, J.

1. In this revision petition filed on behalf of claimants the following two questions have been referred for decision by a Division Bench :-

(a) Whether Motor Accident Claims Tribunal while deciding claim applications filed under the Motor Vehicles Act, is a Civil Court, subordinate to the High Court for the purpose of Sec.115 of the Code of Civil Procedure? and

(b) Whether the orders passed by a Tribunal in those proceedings are amenable to the revisional jurisdiction of the High Court?

The facts leading to this reference lie in a short compass and may be stated thus :

2 Barkat Singh and others (claimants) filed a claim application before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (hereinafter called the Claims Tribunal). During the pendency of those proceedings, they moved an application for impleading Pal Singh as a respondent to the claim application. The Claims Tribunal dismissed the application. The claimants filed a revision petition under Sec.115, Civil P.C. (the Code for short) in this Court. During the hearing of the revision petition, a preliminary objection was raised by the counsel for the respondents that the revision petition was not competent































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top