MANGAT RAM Vs. KAMLESH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Respondents 1 to 4 preferred a claim before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. It appears that they filed the claim beyond time. Accordingly they also made an application for condonation of delay. The Tribunal allowed that application after hearing the parties.

(2.) FEELING aggrieved with this order, the Appellant has filed this first appeal from order. But no such appeal lies. Counsel for the Appellant submitted that an appeal will lie from the order under section 110D of the Motor Vehicles Act. Sub -section (1) of section HOD provides that subject to the provisions of Sub -section (2) any person aggrieved by an award of a Claims Tribunal" may prefer an appeal to the High Court within 90 days from the date of the award. Sub -section (2) provides that no appeal shall lie against any award of a Claims Tribunal if the amount in dispute in the appeal is less than Rs. 2,000/ - . It is evident from the language of section 110D that an appeal is provided for against an award of the Claims Tribunal. In the case before me there is no award of the Tribunal as yet. The claim of the Respondents is still pending before the Tribunal.

(3.) COUNSEL for the Appellant has also relied on G. Gopalaswamiw G. Navalgaris, A.I.R 1967 Mad 403 That case is also distinguishable from the case before me. In that case a claim was filed beyond time. The Tribunal refused to accept the application. And then an appeal was filed. While holding that an appeal lay, the Court said: