Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Rajasthan S.R.T.C. vs Vaibhav Kumar on 18 February, 2015
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Chief Justice, A.K. Sikri, Arun Mishra
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOS.88-89 OF 2011
RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
CORPORATION APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
VAIBHAV KUMAR RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NOS.90-91 OF 2011
CIVIL APPEAL NOS.92-93 OF 2011
CIVIL APPEAL NOS.94 OF 2011
CIVIL APPEAL NOS.95-96 OF 2011
CIVIL APPEAL NOS.97-98 OF 2011
CIVIL APPEAL NO.99 OF 2011
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
NEETU KHAJURIA
Date: 2015.02.21
CIVIL APPEAL NOS.104-105 OF 2011
12:24:29 IST
Reason:
2
CIVIL APPEAL NOS.108-109 OF 2011
CIVIL APPEAL NOS.114-115 OF 2011
CIVIL APPEAL NOS.117-118 OF 2011
O R D E R
1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties to the lis and perused the documents on record. Civil Appeal Nos.88-89, 90-91,92-93,94, 95-96, 97-98, 99, 104-105, 108-109, 114-115 of 2011
2. In this batch of appeals, the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur has followed the judgment and order passed by it in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 10 of 2006, R.S.R.T.C. v. Vaibhav Kumar And Ors., dated 08.03.2011 (Civil Appeal Nos. 88-89 of 2011 before us), whereby and whereunder, the High Court has dismissed the special appeal filed before it on the grounds of being non-maintainable under Section 100-A of the 3 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, “the Code”).
3. The High Court in passing the impugned judgment and order in Civil Appeal Nos.88-89 of 2011 has considered the cut-off date, i.e., 01.07.2002, whereafter Section 100-A of the Code stood amended to the effect that no special appeal from an order passed by the Single Judge in appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, was maintainable before it.
4. In view of the reasons recorded by the High Court, we find no good ground to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court. Civil Appeal NOS.117-118 OF 2011
5. In view of the smallness of amount involved, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court. 4
6. Accordingly, all the civil appeals are dismissed. However, the question of law raised in these appeals is kept open to be agitated in an appropriate case.
..............CJI.
(H.L. DATTU) ................J. (A.K. SIKRI) ................J. (ARUN MISHRA) NEW DELHI;
FEBRUARY 18, 2015 5 ITEM NO.8 COURT NO.1 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 88-89/2011 RAJASTHAN S.R.T.C. Appellant(s) VERSUS VAIBHAV KUMAR Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 90-91/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 92-93/2011 (With prayer for interim relief and Office Report) C.A. No. 94/2011 (With prayer for interim relief and Office Report) C.A. No. 95-96/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 97-98/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 99/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 104-105/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 108-109/2011 (With prayer for interim relief and Office Report) C.A. No. 114-115/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 117-118/2011 (With Office Report) 6 Date: 18/02/2015 These appeals were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA For Appellant(s) Mr. Puneet Jain, Adv.
Ms. Khushbu Jain, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Gupta, Adv. Mr. Christi Jain, Adv. Ms. Chhaya Kirti, Adv. Fro Ms. Pratibha Jain, Adv.
Mr. S. K. Bhattacharya,Adv.
Mr. R. Balasubramanian, Adv. Ms. Rashmi Malhotra, Adv. For Mr. B.V. Balramdas, Adv. For Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv.
Mr. K. L. Janjani,Adv.
Mr. H.D. Thanvi, Adv. For Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. S. K. Bhattacharya,Adv.
Mr. S. K. Verma,Adv.
Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal,Adv.
Ms. Nidhi Jaswal, Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv.
Mr. K.K. Tyagi, Adv.
Mr. Iftekhar Ahmad, Adv. Mr. P. Narasimhan,Adv.
Mr. I.V. Kasyap, Adv. For Mrs. K. Sarada Devi,Adv.
Ms. Neerja Sachdeva, Adv. For Mr. Parmanand Gaur,Adv.7
Mr. Ashwani Garg, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar,Adv.
Ms. Mahalakshmi Pavani, Adv. Mr. G. Balaji, Adv.
For M/s. Mahalakshmi Balaji & Co.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The appeals are dismissed in terms of the signed order.
Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
(Neetu Khajuria) (Vinod Kulvi) Sr.P.A. Assistant Registrar (Signed order is placed on the file.)