United India Insurance Co. Vs. Mahila Ramshree and ors. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/512520
SubjectInsurance;Motor Vehicles
CourtMadhya Pradesh High Court
Decided OnSep-21-1996
JudgeFakhruddin, J.
Reported in2(1997)ACC586
AppellantUnited India Insurance Co.
RespondentMahila Ramshree and ors.
Cases ReferredJairam v. Jagdish Chandra and Ors. Misc. Appeal No.
Excerpt:
- fakhruddin, j.1. this matter has been placed before us pursuant to the orders passed by hon'ble chief justice to consider the question: 'whether a separate notification even after notification no. s.0.368 (e) dated 22.5.1989, was required to be issued or a separate date for state of madhya pradesh was required to be notified for the applicability of the act to the state of madhya pradesh in view of section 3 of the act'. (there appears to be a typographical error. it should be section 1(3) of the act.) sub-section (3) of section 1 of motor vehicles act, 1988 is relevant and is quoted below:(3) it shall come into force on such date as the central government may, by notification in the official gazette, appoint; and different dates may be appointed for different states and any reference in this act to the commencement of this act shall, in relation to a state, be construed as a reference to the coming into force of this act in that state.2. the central government issued a notification in exercise of powers conferred under sub-section (3) of section 1 of the motor vehicles act, 1983 and appointed 1st of july 1989 as the date on which the act shall come into force. the relevant notification published in the gazette of india extra-ordinary, part h, section 3(ii) dated 22.5.1989, is quoted below:s.o. 368 (e). -- in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (3) of section 1 of the motor vehicles act, 1988 (59 of 1988), the central government hereby appoints the 1st day of july, 1989, as the date on which the said act shall come into force.3. that, motor vehicles (amendment) act, 1994 (no. 54 of 1994) has been passed by the parliament. this amendment act has received the assent of the president on 10th september, 1994 and the act published in gazette of india (extraordinary), part ii - section 1, dated 12.9.1994 at pages 1-18. by this act, the motor vehicles act, 1988 has been amended. statement of objects and reasons for act no. 54 of 1994 itself states that the motor vehicles act, 1988 (59 of 1988) consolidated and rationalised various laws regulating road transport. the act came into force with effect from 1st july 1989 replacing the motor vehicles act, 1939. sub-section (2) of section 1 of the motor vehicles (amendment) act, 1994, is relevant and is quoted below:(2) it shall come into force on such date as the central government may, by notification in the official gazette, appoint; and different dates may be appointed for different provisions of this act and any reference in any such provision to the commencement of this act, shall be construed as a reference to the coming into force of that provision.it may be noted that ministry of surface transport issued a notification no. s.o. 728 (e) dated 6th october, 1994, published in gazette of india, extraordinary, part ii, section 3(ii) no. 506 dated 6th october, 1994, as published in the current india statutes 1995, part i, at page 45, which reads as under:s.o. 728 (e) -- (new delhi, the 6th october, 1994) -- in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of section 1 of the motor vehicles (amendment) act, 1994 (54 of 1994), the central government hereby appoints the 1.4th day of november, 1994, as the date on which the said act shall came into force.4. it is pertinent to note that the state of madhya pradesh framed the madhya pradesh motor vehicles rules, 1994. these rules have been published in m.p. rajpatra (asadharan) dated 6.8.1994 at pages 728 (163)-(376). these rules have been framed by the state of madhya pradesh in exercise of the powers conferred under sections 28, 38, 65, 95, 96, 107, 111, 138, 159, 176, 211 and 213 of the motor vehicles act, 1988 (act no. 59 of 1988). the same have been duly published as required under sub-section (1) of section 212 of the said act.5. it may be seen that the motor vehicles act is a central act. it is stated in the act that the act shall come into force on such date as the central government may, by notification in the official gazette, appoint; and different dates may be appointed for different states and any reference in this act to the commencement of this act shall, in relation to a state, be construed as a reference to the coming into force of this act in that state'. the power vests in the central government to issue notification in relation to the subject matter and not in the state government. the act would have come into force in a state if a different date was so notified by the central government. but, the central government had issued above referred notification for all the states with no different dates for commencement of the act. therefore, the provisions of the act came into operation in all the states including the state of madhya pradesh from the appointed date under the above referred notification. as such, no separate notification is further required to be issued in that regard by the central government.6. that, a division bench of the high court of madhya pradesh bench at indore, in misc. appeal no. 200 of 1986, decided on 30.6.1995, jairam v. jagdish chandra and ors., observed in para 12 of the judgment as under:12. amending act no. 59 of 198,8 has not been made effective by the notification of the state government. section 1(3) reads as follows: (3) it shall come into force on such date as the central government, may, by notification in the official gazette, appoint; and different dates may be appointed for different states and any reference in this act to the commencement of this act shall, in relation to a state be construed as a reference to the coming into force of this act in that state. minimum compensation for grievous injury has been enhanced to rs. 25,000/- and for death rs. 50,000/-, but the same shall come into force only when the same is notified. it has not been notified in this state so far.7. learned counsel appearing for the insurance company, mr. j.d. suryavanshi, contended that order passed in jairam's case (supra) was passed by a division bench of this court and the question referred to can be answered only by a larger bench and not by a division bench of this court. this contention has no force. this bench is considering the question referred to in view of the order passed by hon'ble the chief justice when the matter was referred to by hon'ble brother dwivedi, j., sitting singly, in misc. appeal no. 415 of 1995, united india insurance company v. mahila ramshree and ors., order dated 9.4.1996.8. thus, from the text of the order passed in paragraph 12 in jairam v. jagdish chandra and ors. misc. appeal no. 200 of 1986, decided on 30.6.1995, quoted above, it is clear that the relevant law and the notification were not laid before the court in jairam's case. had the court been apprised of the relevant law and notifications with rules framed, namely, madhya pradesh motor vehicles rules, 1994, we have no doubt in our mind that the observations made therein to the effect that -- 'the same shall come into force only when the same is notified. it has not been notified in this state so far' would not have been there. as such the order passed in jairam's case (supra) is per incuriam and therefore has no binding effect.9. in view of the discussion made above we are of the opinion that the motor vehicles act, 1988 came into force from 1st of july 1989. we are also of the opinion that the amendment act (54 of 1994) has also been made applicable pursuant to the notification issued by the ministry of surface transport from 14th of november 1994. the rules have also been framed by the state of madhya pradesh. the reference is accordingly answered. matter be now placed before the single bench.
Judgment:

Fakhruddin, J.

1. This matter has been placed before us pursuant to the orders passed by Hon'ble Chief Justice to consider the question: 'Whether a separate Notification even after Notification No. S.0.368 (E) dated 22.5.1989, was required to be issued or a separate date for State of Madhya Pradesh was required to be notified for the applicability of the Act to the State of Madhya Pradesh in view of Section 3 of the Act'. (There appears to be a typographical error. It should be Section 1(3) of the Act.) Sub-section (3) of Section 1 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is relevant and is quoted below:

(3) It shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, appoint; and different dates may be appointed for different States and any reference in this Act to the commencement of this Act shall, in relation to a State, be construed as a reference to the coming into force of this Act in that State.

2. The Central Government issued a notification in exercise of powers conferred under Sub-section (3) of Section 1 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1983 and appointed 1st of July 1989 as the date on which the Act shall come into force. The relevant notification published in the Gazette of India Extra-ordinary, Part H, Section 3(ii) dated 22.5.1989, is quoted below:

S.O. 368 (E). -- In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (3) of Section 1 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988), the Central Government hereby appoints the 1st day of July, 1989, as the date on which the said Act shall come into force.

3. That, Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 1994 (No. 54 of 1994) has been passed by the Parliament. This Amendment Act has received the assent of the President on 10th September, 1994 and the Act published in Gazette of India (extraordinary), Part II - Section 1, dated 12.9.1994 at pages 1-18. By this Act, the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been amended. Statement of objects and Reasons for Act No. 54 of 1994 itself states that the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (59 of 1988) consolidated and rationalised various laws regulating road transport. The Act came into force with effect from 1st July 1989 replacing the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. Sub-section (2) of Section 1 of the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 1994, is relevant and is quoted below:

(2) It shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint; and different dates may be appointed for different provisions of this Act and any reference in any such provision to the commencement of this Act, shall be construed as a reference to the coming into force of that provision.

It may be noted that Ministry of Surface Transport issued a notification No. S.O. 728 (E) dated 6th October, 1994, published in Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3(ii) No. 506 dated 6th October, 1994, as published in the Current India Statutes 1995, Part I, at page 45, which reads as under:

S.O. 728 (E) -- (New Delhi, the 6th October, 1994) -- In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (2) of Section 1 of the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 1994 (54 of 1994), the Central Government hereby appoints the 1.4th day of November, 1994, as the date on which the said Act shall came into force.

4. It is pertinent to note that the State of Madhya Pradesh framed the Madhya Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1994. These Rules have been published in M.P. Rajpatra (Asadharan) dated 6.8.1994 at pages 728 (163)-(376). These Rules have been framed by the State of Madhya Pradesh in exercise of the powers conferred Under Sections 28, 38, 65, 95, 96, 107, 111, 138, 159, 176, 211 and 213 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (Act No. 59 of 1988). The same have been duly published as required under Sub-section (1) of Section 212 of the said Act.

5. It may be seen that the Motor Vehicles Act is a Central Act. It is stated in the Act that the Act shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint; and different dates may be appointed for different States and any reference in this Act to the commencement of this Act shall, in relation to a State, be construed as a reference to the coming into force of this Act in that State'. The power vests in the Central Government to issue notification in relation to the subject matter and not in the State Government. The Act would have come into force in a State if a different date was so notified by the Central Government. But, the Central Government had issued above referred notification for all the States with no different dates for commencement of the Act. Therefore, the provisions of the Act came into operation in all the States including the State of Madhya Pradesh from the appointed date under the above referred notification. As such, no separate notification is further required to be issued in that regard by the Central Government.

6. That, a Division Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore, in Misc. Appeal No. 200 of 1986, decided on 30.6.1995, Jairam v. Jagdish Chandra and Ors., observed in para 12 of the Judgment as under:

12. Amending Act No. 59 of 198,8 has not been made effective by the Notification of the State Government. Section 1(3) reads as follows:

(3) It shall come into force on such date as the Central Government, may, by notification in the official Gazette, appoint; and different dates may be appointed for different States and any reference in this Act to the commencement of this Act shall, in relation to a State be construed as a reference to the coming into force of this Act in that State. Minimum compensation for grievous injury has been enhanced to Rs. 25,000/- and for death Rs. 50,000/-, but the same shall come into force only when the same is notified. It has not been notified in this State so far.

7. learned Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company, Mr. J.D. Suryavanshi, contended that order passed in Jairam's case (supra) was passed by a Division Bench of this Court and the question referred to can be answered only by a larger Bench and not by a Division Bench of this Court. This contention has no force. This Bench is considering the question referred to in view of the order passed by Hon'ble the Chief Justice when the matter was referred to by Hon'ble brother Dwivedi, J., sitting singly, in Misc. Appeal No. 415 of 1995, United India Insurance Company v. Mahila Ramshree and Ors., order dated 9.4.1996.

8. Thus, from the text of the order passed in paragraph 12 in Jairam v. Jagdish Chandra and Ors. Misc. Appeal No. 200 of 1986, decided on 30.6.1995, quoted above, it is clear that the relevant law and the notification were not laid before the Court in Jairam's case. Had the Court been apprised of the relevant law and notifications with rules framed, namely, Madhya Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1994, we have no doubt in our mind that the observations made therein to the effect that -- 'the same shall come into force only when the same is notified. It has not been notified in this State so far' would not have been there. As such the order passed in Jairam's case (supra) is per incuriam and therefore has no binding effect.

9. In view of the discussion made above we are of the opinion that the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 came into force from 1st of July 1989. We are also of the opinion that the Amendment Act (54 of 1994) has also been made applicable pursuant to the notification issued by the Ministry of Surface Transport from 14th of November 1994. The Rules have also been framed by the State of Madhya Pradesh. The reference is accordingly answered. Matter be now placed before the Single Bench.