RADHEY SHAYM Vs. NAGINA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Civil Revisions arise out of orders passed by the Presiding Officers of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunals at Ballia and Chandauli that are not awards amenable to appeal under Sec. 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The revisions were not formally connected, but since both involve an identical question about maintainability, the issue is being dealt with by a common order.

(2.) Civil Revision No. 66 of 2022 preferred under Sec. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenges an order passed by the Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ballia in Misc. Case No. 22 of 2019, refusing to set aside the ex-parte award dtd. 22/12/2018 passed in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 44 of 2022.

(3.) By the order impugned in Civil Revision No. 48 of 2022, the revisionist has invoked this Court's jurisdiction under Sec. 115 of the Code to set aside the order dtd. 18/10/2021 passed by the Presiding Officer, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chandauli in Misc. Case No. 93 of 2018, whereby the Tribunal has condoned a delay of four years and nine months by the claimants in making an application to restore Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 104 of 2010, that was dismissed in default on 10/12/2013. This Court, noticing some conflict of opinion about the maintainability of a civil revision under Sec. 115 of the Code against an order passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal constituted under the Act, asked the learned Counsel appearing for the revisionists in both matters to address us on the issue of maintainability.