Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
The application stands disposed of
Provisions considered
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ss. 149(2), 170
Judgment
Operative part
Through : Ms. Suman Bagga, Advocate. versus KUSUM DEVI & ORS Through ..... Respondents . . CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL ORDER 08.11.2010 CM No. 19659/2010 Exemption granted subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. MAC APP. NO. 73312010 and CM No. 19658/2010 (for stav) t This appeal has been prefened by the appellant assailing the Award dated 21" August,2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal on the aspect of quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. It is admitted by the appellant that since the owner and driver of the offending bus contested the claim petition on rnerits, hence no permission under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 could be obtained by the appellant. MAC APP. No. 733/2010 Pase No. I of 2 Signature Not Verified Signing Date:12.08.2024 17:00:54 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. / 2 In view of the fact that permission under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is a sine qua non to enable the appellant to assail the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal on grounds other than those enumerated under Section 149(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the present appeal is not maintainable and is accordingly dismissed as such. NOVEMBER 08,2010 ', U K)-*-*YJ REVA KIIETRAPAL,J MAC APP. No.733/2010 Pase No. 2 of 2
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The application stands disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — ss. 149(2), 170.
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.