RAMLALI TIWARI Vs. VRINDAVAN TIWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 16. 10. 2006 in this Misc. Appeal No. 2228/2003 (Smt. Ramlali Tiwari and another Vs. Vrihdavan tiwari and another) has referred following question of law for consideration by a larger Bench :-

(2.) THE Division Bench found that another Division Bench of this Court in Smt. Mayabai Tomar and others Vs. Sheikh Rasheed and others M. A. No-1462/1999 dated 24. 2. 2005 reported in [2005 (II) MPWN Note 21] had indirectly permitted claimant to convert his application from section 166 to section 163-A of the Motor vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'act' for short) while in view of law laid down by the Apex Court in Deepal Girishbhai Soni and others Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. , Baroda [ (2004)5 SCC 385] = (2004 AIR SCW 1464) such recourse was not available to the claimant.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for claimants submitted that there is no specific bar in the act prohibiting such conversion. Section 163-A of the Act was introduced by the parliament by amendment (54 of 1994) w. e. f. 14. 11. 1994 as it was a subsequent amendment after coming into force of the Act w. e. f. 1. 7. 1989. The permission as sought by the appellants/claimants ought to have been granted and the judgment of Smt. Mayabai Tomar is in accordance with law. It was further submitted that the Full Bench of Karnataka High Court in Guruanna Vadi and another Vs. General Manager, Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation and another (2001 ACJ 1528) has specifically held that an application filed under section 166 of the Act may be converted into an application under section 163-A of the Act. He had also relied on Division Bench judgment of Andhra Pradesh High Court in kore Laxmi and others Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. , and others (2005 acj 543) and a Single Bench judgment of Gujarat High Court in Narshiji Nagaji majirana Vs. Mangilal Amturam Bishnoi and others (2005 ACJ 19 ).