Judgment · High Court · 2004
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 s. 163A
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. The learned Counsel appearing Appellant stated entire amount payable Award deposited Tribunal. Hence the Civil Application is disposed of with the following order: (i) The Respondents Nos.1 2 allowed withdraw a Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three only) without security amounts deposited by the Appellant with the…
Judgment
Rule. Respondents Nos.1 2 service. Service on Respondent No.3 is dispensed with. The Application is heard forthwith.
The challenge
First Appeal Judgment Award passed Motor Accident Claims Tribunal invoking provisions section 163A the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988. Primafacie challenge appears restricted quantum compensation awarded. Considering challenge in the appeal, this is a fit case where a sum of Rs.3 lakhs should be allowed to be withdrawn by the Respondents Nos.1 and 2 without furnishing any security.
The learned Counsel appearing Appellant stated entire amount payable Award deposited Tribunal. Hence the Civil Application is disposed of with the following order: (i) The Respondents Nos.1 2 allowed withdraw a Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three only) without security amounts deposited by the Appellant with the Tribunal. (ii) Rest amount deposited Appellant invested Tribunal a depsoit nationalised Bank. Fixed deposit shall be renewed from time to time till disposal of the Appeal. (iii) The payment Rs.3,00,000/- the Respondents Nos.1 and 2 shall be subject to the final result of the appeal. Judge. Judge. Judge.
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — s. 163A.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 16 Aug 2004. The bench was ABHAY S OKA.
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.