Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the right of appeal under the repealed Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 survived the enactment of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and whether the deposit requirement in the proviso to section 173 of the new Act applied to an appeal arising from a claim instituted under the old Act.
Analysis: The claim arose from proceedings instituted under the old Act before the new Act came into force. The repealing provision in section 217(4) preserved the operation of section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, so rights accrued under the repealed enactment were not to be affected unless the new law expressly or by necessary implication provided otherwise. The new Act contained no such retrospective indication. The right of appeal, therefore, crystallised when the claim application was instituted before the Tribunal, and that vested right was not displaced by the later enactment. The deposit condition in the proviso to section 173 could not be imposed on such an appeal.
Conclusion: The appellant was entitled to maintain the appeal without making the deposit required by the proviso to section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Ratio Decidendi: A right of appeal accruing under the law in force when the original proceeding is instituted is a vested right and is preserved on repeal unless the later statute clearly makes the new restriction retrospective.