BARKAT SINGH Vs. HANS RAJ PANDIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this revision petition filed on behalf of claimants the following two questions have been referred for decision by a Division Bench :-

(2.) Barkat Singh and others (claimants) filed a claim application before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (hereinafter called 'the Claims Tribunal'). During the pendency of those proceedings, they moved an application for impleading Pal Singh as a respondent to the claim application. The Claims Tribunal dismissed the application. The claimants filed a revision petition under S.115, Civil P. C. ('the Code' for short) in this Court. During the hearing of the revision petition, a preliminary objection was raised by the counsel for the respondents that the revision petition was not competent because the Claims Tribunal against whose decision the revision petition was filed was not a court of civil judicature and was not a Court subordinate to the High Court. Its orders were not amenable to the revisional jurisdiction of the High Court under S.115 of the Code. The learned counsel for the respondents also contended that the decision of the learned Single Judge of this court in Delhi Bhiwani Transport Co. v. Ram Niwas Surekha 1980 Acc CJ 207, holding that the Claims Tribunal acts as a court while disposing of the claims arising out of the motor vehicles accidents and a revision petition is maintainable against his orders does not lay down correct law under S.115 of the Civil P. C

(3.) Before proceeding to deal with the questions arising in this revision petition, we may briefly refer to the relevant statutory provisions having a bearing on the controversy : Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 :