Skip to content


Search Results Judgments > Act:MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 1988 Section 85

Jun 30 2005

Uttaranchal Sikh Federation and Ors. Vs. State of Uttaranchal and Ors. ...

  • Decided on : 30-Jun-2005

Court : Uttaranchal

Reported in : I(2006)ACC306; AIR2006Utr67

... Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the said Rules shall be deemed to have been issued under the corresponding provision of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Section 129 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is the provision corresponding to Section 85-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. Hence it is contended that Rule 3 of the Motor Vehicles (Protective Headgears) Rules 1980 shall be deemed to have exempted Sikh women from the application of Section 129 of the Motor Vehicles Act ... Motor Vehicles (Protective Headgears) Rules, 1980 were issued under the repealed Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 and since the said Rules were in force immediately before the commencement of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the said Rules shall be deemed to have been issued under the corresponding provision of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Section 129 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is the provision corresponding to Section 85-A of the Motor Vehicles Act ... Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 and since the said Rules were in force immediately before the commencement of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the said Rules shall be deemed to have been issued under the corresponding provision of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Section 129 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is the provision corresponding to Section 85-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. Hence it is contended that Rule 3 of the Motor Vehicles ...

Apr 30 2001

Secy. Federn. of Bus-operators Assn. of T.N. Vs. Union of India (UOI)

  • Decided on : 30-Apr-2001

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 2001(134)ELT618(Mad); 2006[2]STR411; [2007]6STT49

... Section 65(51) defines the term 'tourist vehicle', which reads as under :'tourist vehicle' has the meaning assigned to it in clause (43) of Section 2 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.Section 65 defines the term 'tour operator' as under :'tour operator' means any person engaged in the business of operating tours in a tourist vehicle covered by a permit granted under the Central Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ... Section 2(25) of the Motor Vehicles Act provides 'motor cab' means any motor vehicle constructed or adapted to carry not more than six passengers excluding the driver for hire or reward.48. There can be no doubt that such motor cabs or maxi cabs are plied as 'contract carriages' and/or under Section 88(9) of the Motor Vehicles Act read with Rules 82 to 85 of the Motor Vehicles Act ... Section 2 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.Section 65 defines the term 'tour operator' as under :'tour operator' means any person engaged in the business of operating tours in a tourist vehicle covered by a permit granted under the Central Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 or the rules made thereunder.The term 'cab', 'maxi cab', 'motor cab' and 'rent-a-cab scheme operator' are defined in Section 65 of the Finance Act ...

Aug 29 1988

Ajay Canu Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors.

  • Decided on : 29-Aug-1988

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : II(1988)ACC554; AIR1988SC2027; [1988]1CompCas521(SC); JT1988(3)SC523; 1988(2)SCALE556; (1988)4SCC156; [1988]Supp2SCR632; 1988(2)LC672(SC)

... -A of Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules. Hence this petition for special leave.6. At this stage, it may be noticed that by Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act XXVII of 1977, a new Section being Section 85-A was inserted in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' Section 85-A provides as follows:Section 85-A. Every person driving or riding (otherwise than in a side car) on a motor cycle of any ... )(d) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It was contended by the petitioner before the High Court that as Section 85-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 was yet to be enforced, Rule 498-A was illegal and ultra vires the Motor Vehicles Act. It was also contended that the wearing of helmets preventing the free flow of breeze to the head would result in ... the date of enforcement of Section 85-A as November 1, 1980 was cancelled.8. It is contended by Mr. Ghatate, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, that in view of the cancellation of the notification dated May 14, 1980, Section 85-A has not come into force and, as such, there is no provision in the Motor Vehicles Act providing for wearing of protective ... 14, 1980, Section 85-A has not come into force and, as such, there is no provision in the Motor Vehicles Act providing for wearing of protective headgear or helmet by the driver of a motorcycle of any class while driving the same. It is submitted that in the absence of any specific provision in the Act, Rule 498-A is ultra vires the Act itself and ...

Jul 09 1985

Bharatkumar Arvindkumar Dave Vs. Commissioner of Police and Anr.

  • Decided on : 09-Jul-1985

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (1985)2GLR1411

... Section 85 cannot be construed as limiting the power given to the Commissioner under Section 33 of the Bombay 'Police Act. Sections 85 and 74 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, are only enabling provisions and they do not give any right to the permit-holder to use the vehicle as he likes. Section 33 of the Bombay Police Act cannot be construed as coming into conflict with Sections 74 and 85 ... Section 33 (6) need be followed.6. It was next contended that the power under Section 33 and especially the power now used by the Commissioner prohibiting the pillion rider to ride on the two-wheeled vehicles comes into conflict with Sections 74 and 85 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. Section 74 reads as follows.74. Power to restrict the use of vehicles ... Act visualises passing of order and also making of rules. In respect of passing of order Section 33 (6) need be followed.6. It was next contended that the power under Section 33 and especially the power now used by the Commissioner prohibiting the pillion rider to ride on the two-wheeled vehicles comes into conflict with Sections 74 and 85 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. Section ...

May 18 2005

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Narvada and Ors.

  • Decided on : 18-May-2005

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : IV(2005)ACC158,2007ACJ202

... taken as Rs. 15,000 per annum as per Second Schedule of the Act. It was mentioned that in her case the compensation payable under Section 163-A as per Second Schedule to Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was Rs. 2,85,000. After deducting V3rd, i.e., Rs. 95,000 the amount payable was ... Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was Rs. 2,85,000. After deducting V3rd, i.e., Rs. 95,000 the amount payable was Rs. 1,90,000. In addition thereto a claim was made for Rs. 2,000 on account of funeral expenses, Rs. 2,500 for loss to estate and Rs. 2,000 for medical expenses. Under Section 166 of the Act ... Section 163-A as per Second Schedule to Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was Rs. 2,85,000. After deducting V3rd, i.e., Rs. 95,000 the amount payable was Rs. 1,90,000. In addition thereto a claim was made for Rs. 2,000 on account of funeral expenses, Rs. 2,500 for loss to estate and Rs. 2,000 for medical expenses. Under Section ... the same accident and out of two similar awards dated 27.6.1997 passed by learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (II), Mandi under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The facts necessary for disposal of the case are that the deceased Meenakshi Devi ... can be made under Section 163-A.22. Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides for payment of interim compensation and not final compensation. A Division Bench of this court in Himachal Road Trans. Corporation v. Garji Devi , held that before making an award under Section 140 the Tribunal must on ...

Nov 05 1992

Shyam Lal Kabra Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

  • Decided on : 05-Nov-1992

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 1992(3)WLC369; 1992(2)WLN372

... he was maintaining the tourist vehicles in accordance with the provisions of Sub-section (ii) of Section 88 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') and operating the same in accordance with the provisions of Rules 83, 84 and 85 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989.3. In exercise of the power conferred by the Act, the Central Government as well ... tourist vehicles valid for the whole of Indian incontiguous States including the home State i.e. Rajasthan. A list of permit given to him is attached to the writ petition as Annex. 1. he was maintaining the tourist vehicles in accordance with the provisions of Sub-section (ii) of Section 88 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act ... Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') and operating the same in accordance with the provisions of Rules 83, 84 and 85 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989.3. In exercise of the power conferred by the Act, the Central Government as well as the State Government have made the Rules. The rules made by the Central Government known as 'The Central Motor Vehicles ... Department not below the rank of Motor Vehicle Sub-Inspector.6. From the perusal of the provisions of Sub-section (9) of Section 88 of the Act, Rules 82 to 85 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rule, 1989 read with Sub-rule (2) of Rule 5.19(A) of the Rajasthan Motor Vehicles Rules, 1990, it appears that the tourist vehicle before the commencement of his ...

Sep 15 1990

Mohammed Illyas Vs. Union of India (UO I)

  • Decided on : 15-Sep-1990

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1991KAR2804

... contained in Section 200 of the Act and Rule 259(2) of the Rules in so far they empower any Officer of the Motor Vehicle Department of and above the rank of Inspector of Motor Vehicles to exercise the power under Section 200 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 are violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution?2) Whether the Notification bearing No. FTD 18 TMR 85 dated ... Inspector of Motor Vehicles to exercise the power under Section 200 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 are violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution?2) Whether the Notification bearing No. FTD 18 TMR 85 dated 13-11-1986 is liable to be quashed being violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution?3) Whether the operators of the tourist vehicles are ... Section 200 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 are violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution?2) Whether the Notification bearing No. FTD 18 TMR 85 dated 13-11-1986 is liable to be quashed being violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution?3) Whether the operators of the tourist vehicles are entitled to a declaration that the tourist vehicles ... provisions in the Act i.e., Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. As far as the Notification dated 13-11-1986 is concerned, the same has been saved having regard to the provisions contained in Section 217(2)(a) of the Act.3(a). In view of the fact that Section 200 of the Act contains the provisions similar to Section 127B of the 1939 Act and also that the Act contains many provisions ...

May 30 2003

Delhi Pradesh Taxi Union and Anr. Vs. Airport Authority of India and O ...

  • Decided on : 30-May-2003

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2(2003)ACC710; II(2003)ACC710; 2003IVAD(Delhi)713; 105(2003)DLT479; 2003(69)DRJ459

... Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Rules framed there under. The writ petition was filed on the ground that the vehicles for which permit had been granted to respondent No. 8 could be plied as contract carriages and not as stage carriages and since under Section 2(7) of the Motor Vehicles Act (in short referred to as `the Act ... Sections 74 and 88(9) of the Act shows that the tourist vehicle to which a permit is issued under sub-Section (9) of Section 88 can be used only as a `contract carriage' as defined in Section 2(7) of the Act. A tourist permit under Section 88(9) is granted under Chapter 4 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as `1989 Rules'). Under Rule 85 ... vehicles of respondent No. 8, registration numbers of which were given in the writ petition being plied between IGI Airport and Amritsar, do not carry passengers against the individually issued tickets and to ensure that they adhere to the mandatory requirements of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Rules framed there under. The writ petition was filed on the ground that the vehicles ...

Aug 25 1997

M/s. Indian Telephone Industries, Bangalore Vs. State of Karnataka and ...

  • Decided on : 25-Aug-1997

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : 1998(1)KarLJ276

... 1988. The notice justified the demand on the ground that the petitioner was not solelydependent upon agricultural income which was according to the respondent an essential condition for an exemption under Section 16(3) of the Taxation Act, read with Rule 85-B of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, 1963 introduced by the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules 1963 introduced by the Karnataka Motor Vehicles ... Act for the period 1-4-1971 to 30th of September, 1988. The notice justified the demand on the ground that the petitioner was not solelydependent upon agricultural income which was according to the respondent an essential condition for an exemption under Section 16(3) of the Taxation Act, read with Rule 85-B of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, 1963 introduced by the Karnataka Motor Vehicles ... 85-B of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, 1963 introduced by the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules 1963 introduced by the Karnataka Motor Vehicles (6th Amendment) Rules, 1983. Aggrieved, the petitioner has questioned the validity of the demand in the present proceedings.2. Smt. Sangeetha, Counsel for the petitioner raised a short point in support of the petition. She urged that Section 16(3) of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act ...

Mar 24 1998

Ignatia Kujur and Ors. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr.

  • Decided on : 24-Mar-1998

Court : Patna

... Commissioner, Ranchi in Comp. Case No. 85 of 1991 under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (Ignatia Kujur v. Rameshwar Singh).Annexure B: Money ReceiptI, Ignatia Kujur w/o late William Kujur, the claimant of Compensation Case No. 85 of 1991 have received the payment in full and final satisfaction of the award passed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act and have received the cheque being No ... compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ranchi, in Compensation Case No. 85 of 1991 filed this appeal for the enhancement of compensation amount.2 The claimants-appellants as heirs of late William Kujur filed a claim case before the Claims Tribunal, Ranchi, for the grant of compensation on account of death of William Kujur in a motor vehicle accident.3. The case ... Claims Tribunal, Ranchi, for the grant of compensation on account of death of William Kujur in a motor vehicle accident.3. The case of the claimants-appellants is that when the deceased was going to H.E.C. on 25.3.1991 by his Rajdoot motor cycle he was killed by a Trekker bearing the registration No. BPM 2382 which was being driven ...

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //