R.R.YADAV,J. - (1.) HEARD .
(2.) PERUSED the order impugned dated 3.10.1996 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajsamand rejecting the application of the petitioner for leave to withdraw Rs. 50,000/ - deposited in his Fixed Deposits Account No. 19368 in the Bank of Baroda, Nathdwara District Rajsamand for purposes of solemnising marriage of his graduate daughter Miss Deepika aged about 22 years with Anil son of Shri Onkar Lal Chaplot resident of Fateh Nagar Sanward District Udaipur scheduled to be solemnised on 12.12.1996. The impugned dated 3.10.96 has been challenged by the petitioner by way of filing the instant revision without disclosing the provisions either under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 or the Rules framed thereunder.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the revisionist urged before me that the District Judge who functions as a Claims Tribunal under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is not only within the administrative control of the High Court but also subordinate to it under Section 115, C.P.C., therefore, the aforesaid impugned order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal is revisable under Section 115, C.P.C. In support of his aforesaid contention, he placed reliance on a decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in case of Darshan Singh v. Ghewar Chand and Ors. reported in .;