This judgment disposed of a Civil Revision Petition filed to challenge an award of Rs. 3000/- with interest for simple injury. The Court held that no interference under Article 227 was warranted due to the lack of patent illegality or manifest injustice.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5350 OF 2008
ORDER:
The order of the IV Additional District Judge-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kurnool dated 7.1.2008 is the subject matter of challenge in this revision proceedings under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
The 1st respondent herein who is the petitioner in the M.V.O.P. had suffered an injury which the Court below held to be grievous, but which the petitioner herein contends is simple. Be that as it may, the Court below awarded Rs.3000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. It is this measly sum of Rs.3000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum, which is sought to be challenged in this revision proceedings under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
This Court would not exercise its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as a matter of course and save manifest injustice or patent illegality, no interference would be called for. As it is not in dispute that the respondent suffered an injury, and the dispute is limited to the question whether the injury is grievous or simple, award of Rs.3000/- with interest at 7.5% per annum hardly necessitates interference in revision proceedings under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
The C.R.P. fails and is, accordingly, dismissed.
asp
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should exercise jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to interfere with an award of Rs. 3000/- for simple injury in a motor accident case.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN CONTESTED CASE
MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL OR ITS OPPOSITION
RAMESH RANGANATHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
