1. The present MCC has been filed for restoration of MAC No.1355/2017 which got dismissed vide peremptory order dated 11/10/2017. The
peremptory order passed by this Court was granting the liberty to the petitioner for depositing the minimum amount required for preferring an appeal
under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The time granted was 3 weeks time failing which the MAC would stand dismissed.
2. It appears that the appellant have not complied with the order. The only ground for non-compliance appears to have been that he was not aware of
the peremptory order passed by this Court. No submission have been made by the petitioner as to why the appellant could not deposit the amount
which was otherwise required while filing of an appeal within the period of 3 weeks .’
3. Under the circumstances, since the appeal itself was not maintainable without compliance of mandatory requirement as is required under Section
173 of the Motor Vehicles Act and even after the extended time of 3 weeks’ granted by this Court, the appellant fails to comply with the order the
MAC rightly stood rejected.
4. Thus, this Court does not find any strong case made out by the counsel for the appellant for recalling of the order passed on 11/10/2017.
5. The MCC thus fails and is accordingly rejected.
6. However, the reluctance of this Court in entertaining the present MCC does not preclude the applicant from preferring a fresh appeal after due
compliance of the mandatory provision under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act as the earlier appeal i.e. MAC No.1355/2017 was not dismissed on
merits.
