HANEEF Vs. MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has challenged the order dated 16.1.1999, Annexure -5 to the writ petition, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jhansi under the provision of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

(2.) THE facts leading to the filing of present writ petition are that according to the petitioner, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal decided that case ex parte, he, therefore, filed an application for setting aside the ex parte order under Order IX, Rule 13, read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure. The Tribunal, after affording opportunity to the petitioner, has rejected the aforesaid application under Order IX, Rule 13, read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure. It is this order, which has been challenged by the petitioner before this Court by means of the present writ petition.

(3.) A perusal of the aforesaid section would clearly demonstrate that the petitioner, if feels aggrieved by the award, only remedy as available to the petitioner was to approach the High Court under Section 173(1) of the Act. This writ petition, therefore, is not maintainable on the ground that the petitioner did not avail the statutory remedy under Section 173(1) of the Act under which the High Court itself was conferred with the power to deal with the appeal, which lies on facts as well as on law.