ANIL SARAF Vs. NAMBOODAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant Mr. Ashok Lalwani submitted that in this case the appellant has not made the deposit as required under the first proviso to Section 173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and he has addressed the court that in the first proviso (aforesaid) the word 'entertain' is used which signifies 'not at the admission stage' but signifies the stage of final hearing.

(2.) THEREAFTER, he modified the submission that he means to submit that the condition of entertainment of the appeal regarding the deposit of the amount is mandatory provision in between the stage of admission and final hearing and as such, since the case is posted in motion hearing, he is not required, under the law, to make the deposit. The stage of depositing the amount as mentioned in the proviso would come after the appeal is admitted in the motion hearing.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the appellant has relied on the provisions of Order 21, Rule 90, Civil Procedure Code, Clause (b) as per amendment made by Allahabad High Court, which is as extracted below: (b) Unless the applicant deposits such amount not exceeding twelve and half per cent of the sum realised by the sale or furnishes such security as the court may, in its discretion, fix except when the court, for reasons to be recorded, dispenses with the requirements of this Clause.