V.M.Sahai and Ran Vijai Singh, JJ. - (1.) THIS appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in brief the Act, 1988) has been filed by Regional Manager, U. P. State Road Transport Corporation, Agra challenging the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mathura dated 16.1.2007.
(2.) THE brief facts are that an accident took place on 24.12.2000 at 5.30 p.m. with Bus No. UP-80/E-9852 which hit Moped on which the claimant and his friend were travelling. Due to injuries suffered in the accident the right hand of the claimant was amputated and the claimant filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Act claiming Rs. 15,00,000 as compensation alongwith 12% interest for the permanent disability suffered by him. THE claim petition was contested by the appellant. THE Motor Accident Claims Tribunal recorded a finding that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Bus. It further held that insurer of Moped was not necessary party. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal assessed the loss of the income and awarded Rs. 8,11,351 compensation alongwith 6% interest. When the appeal was filed it was admitted on 19.4.2007 and a conditional stay order was passed by a Division Bench of this Court. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 19.4.2007 the appellant filed Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 25771 of 2007 which was renumbered as Civil Appeal No. 1868 of 2008 which has been disposed by the Apex Court by the following order : "................Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 8,11,351 alongwith interest at the rate of 6% from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment. While admitting the appeal the High Court, according to the appellant should not have directed deposit of the entire amount and should not have permitted the claimant to be paid the amount of deposit. Notice has not yet been issued in this matter but we feel that the impugned order of the High Court is practically unreasoned and no reason has been indicated as to why the High Court felt that the amount was to be paid to the claimant on deposit. Therefore, we direct the High Court to reconsider the matter and pass fresh order. We have passed this order to avoid unnecessary delay and inconvenience to the parties." We have heard Shri Samir Sharma for the appellant and Shri B. P. Verma learned counsel appearing for respondents. The learned counsel for the claimant/respondent Shri B. P. Verma has raised a preliminary objection that the appeal filed by the Regional Manager, U. P. State Road Transport Corporation, Agra is not maintainable. The matter has been listed today for orders. With the consent of counsel for the parties, we have taken up this appeal for final hearing of the preliminary objection raised by learned counsel for the respondent.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the claimant/respondent has urged that Regional Manager, U. P. State Road Transport Corporation, Agra had no authority to file an appeal and the appeal could only be filed by U. P. State Road Transport Corporation. On the other hand Shri Samir Sharma learned counsel for the appellant has urged that since Regional Manager, U. P. State Road Transport Corporation, Agra was impleaded as party to the claim petition, therefore, the appeal filled by the appellant is maintainable. He has further urged that before the Apex Court, U. P. State Road Transport Corporation through the Regional Manager, Shajadi Mandi, Gwalior Road, Agra had filed a special leave petition (civil) challenging the order dated 19.4.2007, therefore, the appeal filed by appellant has to be treated to have been filed by U. P. State Road Transport Corporation and is maintainable. He urged that he may be permitted to amend the array of appellant. The first question is whether an appeal filed before this Court by the Regional Manager, U. P. State Road Transport Corporation is maintainable. It is not disputed that the U. P. State Road Transport Corporation had been established under Section 3 of the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950 (in brief the Act, 1950). Section 4 of the Act, 1950 is extracted below : "4. Incorporation. - Every Corporation shall be a body corporate by the name notified under Section 3 having perpetual succession and a common seal, and shall by the said name sue and be sued." ;