The main legal point established in the judgment is that Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is not applicable to proceedings before the Tribunal under the Motor Vehicle Act, as per Rule 221 of the U.P. Motor Vehicle Act, 1988.

Attau Rahman Masoodi, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This civil revision under Section 115 Code of Civil Procedure assails an order passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Lucknow on 07.12.2013 contained in (annexure No.15) filed alongwith the revision, whereby the application filed by the revisionist, seeking extension of time for complying with the order dated 29.08.2013 to the extent of providing surety was rejected. Although by an order dated 29.08.2013 the original award rendered on 31.08.2012 by an exparte order was recalled subject to three conditions: -

(i) Application has been allowed on the cost of Rs. 2000/-.

(ii) The revisionist shall furnish an undertaking regarding the awarded amount.

(iii) The revisionist shall file surety regarding the awarded amount.

3. The revisionist is stated to have complied with the first two conditions, however, filing surety in respect of claim allowed was not complied within the time specified in the order dated 29.08.2013 and consequently the revisionist filed an application for extension of time which has been rejected by order dated 07.12.2013 impugned in the present revision. On a question being put to the learned counsel for the revisionist as to how the revision is maintainable under Section 115 Code of Civil procedure, it is argued that the revisional jurisdiction of this Court is available as per the Full Bench Judgement rendered by this Court in Kamla Yadav Vs. Smt. Shushma Devi reported in [2004(22)LCD 40].

4. It is to be noted that U.P. Motor Vehicle Rules 1988 came into force on 07.09.1998 where in the extent of application of code of civil procedure has been provided for under Rule 221. All claims instituted before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal are adjudicated under Section 166 as per procedure prescribed under Section 169 which reads as under: -

"Procedure and powers of Claims Tribunals- (1) In the holding any inquiry under Section 168, the Claims Tribunal may, subject to any rules that may be made in this behalf, follow such summary procedure as it thinks fit.

(2) The Claims Tribunal shall have all the powers of a Civil Court for the purpose of taking evidence on oath and of enforcing the attendance of witnesses and of compelling the discovery and production of documents and material objects and for such other purposes as may be prescribed; and the Claims Tribunal shall be deemed to be a Civil Court for all the purposes of Section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974).

(3) subject to any rules that may be made in this behalf, the Claims Tribunal may, for the purpose of adjudicating upon any claim for compensation, choose one or more persons possessing special knowledge of and matter relevant to the inquiry to assist it in holding the inquiry"

5. Section 169 clearly provides the extent of application of Code of Civil Procedure to be subject to any Rule that may be made in this behalf. U.P. Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 have since come into force on 07.09.1998 where under Rules 221 reads as under: -

" Code of Civil Procedure to apply in certain cases.- The following provisions of the First Schedule to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 shall so far as may be apply to proceedings before the Claims Tribunal, namely, Rules 9 to 13 and 15 to 30 of Order V; Order IX, Rules 3 to 10 of Order XIII, Rules 2 to 21 of Order XVI; Order XVII; and Rules 1 to 3 of Order XXIII."

6. From a plain reading of the aforesaid Rule 221 it is gathered that Section 115 Code of Civil Procedure is not made applicable in so far as the proceedings before the Tribunal under the Motor Vehicle are concerned.

7. The Full Bench judgment does not notice the aforesaid rule, whereas in a Division Bench judgment of this Court rendered at a later point of time, reported in 2007 AWC 1927, it has been observed as under: -

Section173 of the M.V. Act provides for appeal to High Court by any person aggrieved by an award of the Claims T