ASHOK Vs. ASHOK SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri H. S. Rajpal, for Petitioner; Shri S. S. Chawla, for Re. No. 3. This revision is being finally decided on the prayer of both the parties.

(2.) The main grievance of the petitioner is that the Tribunal rejected the prayer for interim relief under S. 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 (hereinafter referred to as Act), for no reasons. Shri Rajpal submitted that there is a certificate from the medical practitioner from Choithram Hospital certifying that the Petitioner suffers 10% permanent disability because of the accident in question.

(3.) The principle behind enacting S. 140 of the Act is benevolent and it is specially made for the purpose of giving interim relief to a victim who has approached the Tribunal for getting the compensation for the permanent disability suffered by him in an accident in which vehicle has been involved. When there is a certificate of medical practitioner certifying a permanent disability, there is no reason for Tribunal to reject a prayer for interim relief in view of S. 140 of the Act. Therefore, the Tribunal has obviously committed the illegality.