High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 03 CHH CK 0060

RAM RATAN BANJARE vs JAINURAM SORI

Chhattisgarh High Court · Decided on 16 March 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
P. SAM KOSHY
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
MCC No. 170 of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 270 words
1.

The present MCC has been filed for restoration of MAC No.1355/2017 which got dismissed vide peremptory order dated 11/10/2017. The

peremptory order passed by this Court was granting the liberty to the petitioner for depositing the minimum amount required for preferring an appeal

under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The time granted was 3 weeks time failing which the MAC would stand dismissed.

2.

It appears that the appellant have not complied with the order. The only ground for non-compliance appears to have been that he was not aware of

the peremptory order passed by this Court. No submission have been made by the petitioner as to why the appellant could not deposit the amount

which was otherwise required while filing of an appeal within the period of 3 weeks .’

3.

Under the circumstances, since the appeal itself was not maintainable without compliance of mandatory requirement as is required under Section

173 of the Motor Vehicles Act and even after the extended time of 3 weeks’ granted by this Court, the appellant fails to comply with the order the

MAC rightly stood rejected.

4.

Thus, this Court does not find any strong case made out by the counsel for the appellant for recalling of the order passed on 11/10/2017.

5.

The MCC thus fails and is accordingly rejected.

6.

However, the reluctance of this Court in entertaining the present MCC does not preclude the applicant from preferring a fresh appeal after due

compliance of the mandatory provision under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act as the earlier appeal i.e. MAC No.1355/2017 was not dismissed on

merits.