LAXMINARAIN MISRA Vs. KAILASH NARAIN GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHRI Laxmi Narain Mishra, who is opposing certain proceedings instituted against him under sec. 110 A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1930 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act) before the District Judge, Alwar, constituting the Claims Tribunal under the Act, moves this Court for transferring the proceedings to another Claims Tribunal and invokes the powers of this Court under sec. 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) THE transfer was sought principally on two grounds: One on account of his having an apprehension against Shri Sohanraj Kothari, District Judge, on the basis of certain orders passed by him from time to time, that the petitioner would not get justice from Shri Kothari. THE other one was of hardship caused to the petitioner as no advocate at Alwar was accepting any brief for him, as Shri Kailash Narain Gupta, the applicant before the Claims Tribunal as also his father were advocates practising at Alwar.

(3.) NOW, a Claims Tribunal functioning under the Act deals very much with the rights and obligations of the citizens. Prior to the enactment of the fascicule of sec. 110 A and onwards, the liability of owners of motor vehicles arising out of accidents involving such motor vehicles was determined by regularly constituted civil courts. Parliament, however, felt that the remedy, apart from being burdened with heavy court fee, was tardy in its working. It could not speedily deal with large number of claims of aggrieved persons and therefore by the Amendment Act (100 of 1956) these new sections were added. These provisions were designed to ensure a speedy remedy to persons receiving bodily injuries and to the heirs of persons meeting with death in such accidents. Therefore, I have to gather, in the first instance from the relevant provisions of the statute, as to what the parliament meant to provide as an adjunct or a substitute of the prevailing remedy to an aggrieved person.