(1.) It is not uncommon for the Courts to be invited to decide the contours of its own powers under a given provisions of law - constitutional or statutory. The present set of Writ Petitions as well as Civil Revision Petitions too call for determination of the scope of the powers of judicial review under Article 226 and power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, on the one hand, and the ambit of the revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, on the other.
(2.) Whether an insurer, under any circumstance, can impugn an award rendered by a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in an application under Article 226 and/or 227 of the Constitution of India and whether this constitutional remedy is completely barred so far as an insurer is concerned are the principal questions, which the present set of writ petitions have raised? What has also been raised is the question as to whether an insurer can invoke revisional jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as "the Code") on the grounds beyond those, which are available to an insurer under Section 149(2) of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the M.V. Act")
(3.) By this common order, I propose to decide, first, the maintainability of the present set of Writ Petitions and Civil Revision Petitions, for, maintainability of all these Writ Petitions and Civil Revision Petitions has been challenged on, broadly speaking, similar grounds, the same have been heard together and are capable of being disposed of by one common order.