Implied power of remand under appellate jurisdiction exists, but its exercise must be justified by the record.

An appellate tribunal exercising powers under Section 64 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 has implied authority to remand a matter where that course is necessary for effective appellate disposal; the power is treated as incidental to appellate jurisdiction. On the facts, however, the existing record was sufficient for decision and a fresh disposal by the Regional Transport Authority was unnecessary, so the remand order was not justified. The tribunal should have decided the appeal on the available materials instead of sending the matter back.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a State Transport Appellate Tribunal exercising appellate power under Section 64 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 has an implied power to remand a matter to the Regional Transport Authority for fresh disposal; (ii) Whether, on the facts of the case, the order of remand was sustainable.

Issue (i): Whether a State Transport Appellate Tribunal exercising appellate power under Section 64 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 has an implied power to remand a matter to the Regional Transport Authority for fresh disposal.

Analysis: Section 64 does not expressly mention remand, but the appellate jurisdiction conferred by it is not confined to a mere formal hearing. Where a statute creates an appeal, it carries by necessary implication such powers as are essential to the effective exercise of that jurisdiction. A remand is an ordinary incident of appellate power when the appellate authority cannot properly dispose of the matter on the existing record. The tribunal, functioning in a quasi-judicial capacity, therefore has the implied authority to send the matter back for fresh decision when justice and the appellate function require it.

Conclusion: The power to remand is available to a tribunal acting under Section 64 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939.

Issue (ii): Whether, on the facts of the case, the order of remand was sustainable.

Analysis: On the material before the appellate tribunal, the record was sufficient for decision and a fresh disposal by the Regional Transport Authority was unnecessary. The remand was not justified on the circumstances found by the Court, and the tribunal should have decided the appeal on the available materials instead of returning the matter.

Conclusion: The order of remand was not sustainable on the facts.

Final Conclusion: The appellate tribunal possessed an implied power of remand under the Act, but the remand ordered in this case was unwarranted, so the appeal failed.

Ratio Decidendi: A statute conferring appellate jurisdiction implicitly includes all powers necessary for its effective exercise, including remand, but the exercise of that power must be justified by the circumstances of the case.

---