(1.) THE expression 'an appeal' occurring in Section 110 -D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (and now in Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988) has given rise to these matters before the Full Bench. Does the expression 'an appeal' connote number of appeals available to an aggrieved person or is it used as requirement of grammar of English language to write the correct language? This, in short, is the question to be examined and decided by the Full Bench in both these appeals. The special appeals arise out of the judgment rendered by the learned single Judge in appeals under Section 110 -D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short 'the Act'). In both these special appeals, the Division Bench of this court by order dated 10.8.1993 referred the following question to a larger Bench:
(2.) IN an unfortunate automobile accident which took place in Jodhpur on 21.5.1979, a truck bearing No. RJT 4061 was involved. In the aforesaid accident, two persons died. The heirs and legal representatives of the deceased filed two claim petitions before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal'). The Tribunal allowed the claim petitions to certain extent. The owners and driver of the vehicle preferred appeals before the High Court as provided under Section 110 -D of the Act. In both the appeals, the learned single Judge held that the insurance company was liable to satisfy the award passed by the Tribunal. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the learned single Judge, these two special appeals bearing No. 604 of 1989 and 605 of 1989 have been filed under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949.
(3.) OUR attention has been drawn to the following two decisions of the Division Bench of this court wherein the view taken is that the special appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949, is not maintainable against the judgment and order passed by the learned single Judge in an appeal under Section 110 -D of the Act: