( 1 ) WHEN this appeal first came before us, we were tentatively of the opinion that it would not be maintainable under the provisions of S. 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, since the proceedings arose under the old Motor Vehicles Act. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant, however, we disposed of the matter by our order dated 4th August, 1989 (reported in AIR 1990 All 30) holding that even an appeal arising out of proceedings under S. 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 would now be maintainable under S. 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The appellant has now moved an application for review of our earlier decision on the ground that while disposing of the question of maintainability of the appeal under S. 173 of the new Act, we have wrongly directed that such appeals must also comply with the conditions as are laid down in the section. It is contended that this aspect of the matter was also urged on earlier occasion but due to some oversight, this has not been considered in the light of the submissions made then. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant at some length, we do feel that the cases that were cited earlier and also durin