RAJESH KUMAR MAMGAIN Vs. RAJ SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 22.7.2010 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) passed by Addl. District Judge/F.T.C.-II, Dehradun.

(2.) By the impugned order, learned Addl. District has dismissed the application moved by the petitioner/claimant for execution of award on the ground of delay and has held that provision of Order 21 C.P.C. would not apply. So far as limitation is concerned, for application filed under Section 174 of Motor Vehicles Act, Article 137, which provides limitation of three years, would be attracted.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the approach of learned Tribunal is erroneous since there is no limitation prescribed u/s. 174 of the Act. If a petition can be entertained without any limitation, likewise the application for execution can also be maintained since it is a special act. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon a judgment of the Apex Court passed in Motor Accident Claim Case in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. C. Padma and another, 2003 AIR(SC) 4394 wherein at para-12 it has been held as under:-