✦ Chhattisgarh High Court · 22 Dec 2005

VijayKumar ChoudharyS/o Late Shri v. RESPONDENTO

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

VijayKumar ChoudharyS/o Late Shri Jagdeven Choudhary, Choudhary Motor Service Main Road Distt.- Lohar Daga, Jharkhand. Versus RESPONDENTO

1.

State Transport Appeallate Trtbunal Ralpur

2.

Assistant Secretery State Transport Authority D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur Chhatttegarh

3.

Regional Transport Authorfty Through- Secrefaiy D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.)

4.

Kishore Kumar Mantri S/o Late Fateh Chand Mantri Ratu Road, Ranchi Jharkhand. Present: Sihg Ajay Shrivastava, Shri Yaswant Singh, leamed GA, for the State of Chhattisgarh. leamed counselforthepetitioner. ORALORDER (Passed on 22m December, 200^ The petitioner has preferred a revision petition to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal against the order of counter signature and the said revision petition is psnding. In ftat revision p^tion, it appears ttiat the petitionw made an applicaUon for stay. That apptication has bean rejected by the STAT by the impugned order.

2. Heard learned counset forpeUtioner.

3. The order made under secUon 88(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is adverse to the petitjoner. Unless the pelittoner succeeds before the revisional authority, it is rieHher juat nor fair to grant fte tnterim order. .sfi Q 0db »n- a--

4. In that view of fce matter, the discreUon ©(ercisedby the STAT in rejecting the opptteaBon could not be faulted with. The writ petition is therafore, dismissed. However, the STAT is directod to dispose ofthe revision prefsrred by the petiUoner within ai period ofSKweeks fmm Uie date of receipt of a copy of this order. 4 SdA- CbiefJustice e"°k';a/*

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Chhattisgarh High Court, on 22 Dec 2005.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Chhattisgarh High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments