Quashed

Ashit Rohit Shah v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC8 Feb 2024WP/10089/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenged a Tribunal order awarding compensation under Section 140 MV Act for an accident after that provision was omitted. The High Court held that on the accident and filing dates Section 160 was not in force, so the Tribunal's order was without jurisdiction, quashed it and dismissed the claim application.

What did the court decide?

Impugned Tribunal order dated 10 July 2023 quashed and set aside; application at Exhibit 2 in MACT No. 1743/2022 stands dismissed.

Ashit Rohit Shah Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Gayatri

¶2

1-WP-10089.23.docx

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10089 OF 2023

¶4

Ashit Rohit Shah

¶5

Adult of Indian inhabitant Occupation : Business Having his address at 303/403, Viceroy Image B/H, ABS Tower, O. P. Road, Vadodara Gujarat – 390007.

¶6

… Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The State of Maharashtra

¶9

Pallavi Uttam Munj,

¶10

Adult aged about 44 years, Occupation : not known,

¶11

House No. 524, Marzaban road, Next to pre Mansion Hall, Fort, Fmumbai – 400 001

¶12

Ashok Patel

¶13

Adult age about 48 years House No. 524, Marzaban road, Next to pre Mansion Hall, Fort Mumbai – 400 001.

¶14

Tata AIG Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd.

¶15

a registered company, having its office at 2^nd floor, Unit No. SB-143 TO 146, Highland Corporate Centre, Kapurbawdi Junction Majiwada, Thane – 400 607.

...Petitioners

1/4

1-WP-10089.23.docx

Ms. Simran Wagle, Advocate for Petitioner.

¶20

Mr. Devendranath S. Joshi, Advocate for Respondent No. 4- Insurance company.

¶21

Mr. P. P. Pujari, AGP for the State.

¶22

CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATE : 8^th FEBRUARY 2024

¶23

P.C.

¶24

This petition is listed today for final disposal at admission stage, pursuant to order dated 2^nd February 2024.

¶25

The limited issue involved in this petition is about omission of Chapter X of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (“MV Act”) and the relevant date from which the said omission was made effective.

¶26

The petition takes an exception to the order dated 10^th July 2023 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mumbai below an application at Exhibit 2 in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 1743 of 2022 filed under Section 140 of the MV Act. By the said order, application filed under Section 140 is allowed and the petitioner as well as the insurer is directed to pay compensation under Section 140.

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the claim is filed

¶28

by respondent nos. 2 and 3 claiming compensation with reference to

¶29

2/4

¶30

1-WP-10089.23.docx

¶31

an accident that occurred on 27^th November 2022. She submits that

¶32

the claim application is filed on 17^th December 2022. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by notification dated 30^th August 2019, the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019 was brought into force. She further submits that by way of notification dated 25^th February 2022 Section 50 of the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019 was made effective from the 1^st April 2022. She submits that on the date of the accident and on the date of filing application the provision of Section 140 was not on the statute book. She submits that the impugned order is passed without any jurisdiction. She therefore, submits that this petition is filed for challenging the said order which is passed without support of any provision.

¶33

Learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 4 does not dispute the aforesaid legal provisions. Though respondent nos. 2 and 3 are served and on the last occasion they were represented by some advocate as it indicates in the order dated 2^nd February 2024, none appears today.

¶34

In view of the undisputed dates with respect to omission of Chapter X of the MV Act containing Section 140 of the MV Act, the

¶35

3/4

¶36

1-WP-10089.23.docx

¶37

impugned order is passed by the Tribunal without support of any legal provision in existence on the statute book. Hence, the impugned order is without any jurisdiction.

¶38

For the reasons stated above, the impugned order dated 10^th July 2023 passed below Exhibit 2 in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 1743 of 2022 filed under Section 140 of the MV is quashed and set aside and the application at Exhibit 2 - stands dismissed.

¶39

All parties to act on an authenticated copy of this order.

¶40

Digitally signed GAYATRI by GAYATRIRAJENDRA RAJENDRA SHIMPI SHIMPI Date:2024.02.14 15:35:15 +0530

¶41

[GAURI GODSE, J.]

¶42

4/4

Ashit Rohit Shah v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashit Rohit Shah v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Maruti Tukaram Kudle and Ors. Vs Mr. Ramji Arjun Phatak Decd Thru Lhrs and Ors.

Digitech Electornic Systems Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs Shreeji Chambers Premises Co-Op Soc. Ltd. and Anr.

Dnyaneshwar Vasudev Bhilare Vs the Chief Officer , Raigad Zilla Parishad and Ors.

Shri.Vishwanath Murlidhar Desai Vs Shri. Shivram Bandu Burde and Others.

Shri Laxman Fakira Jondhale Vs Shri Suresh Mahadu Jondhale and Ors.

Appalal Jamal Khalif (Deceased through His Legal Heirs) vs Babalal Ismail Khalif (Deceased through His Legal Heirs)