hvn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICUATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CIVIL SIDE P.I.L. NO. 227 OF 2009 Courts on its own motion ... Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. M.S. Karnik for High Court. Mr. Ravi Kadam, Advocate General with Mr. N.P. Deshpande, A.G.P. for State. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & J.H. BHATIA, JJ. DATED : JANUARY 21, 2010 P.C. This court has taken Sou Motu notice of the failure by the State in not complying with the requirements of Section 158(6) of the Motor Vehicles Act. Directions were issued on 12.12.2009. Subsequent to that, we find that similar issue was in issue before the Hon’ble Supreme Court being Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 11801-11804 of 23005 in the case of Jayprakash Vs. National Insurance Company and Others which has been disposed of by the learned Supreme Court and wherein also consequential directions have been issued. By that judgment the learned Supreme Court addressed itself to the very issue before this court namely non compliance with the mandate of section 158(6) of the Motor Vehicle Act. The said directions in our opinion, will cover the issues that had arisen before this court and in respect of which sou motu notice has been taken. Para 8 of the said judgment of the Supreme Court deals with the various directions that are issued to the police authorities. Para 12 of the directions issued to the Claims tribunal. Apart from that there are certain suggestions which are contained in the said judgment and further the Supreme Court registry itself has been directed to put up further suggestions. In other words, the learned Supreme Court is seized of the matter. Pursuant to the said directions, the State of Maharahstra has issued notification on 19.1.2010 incorporating the directions issued by the Supreme Court and notifying the same to the police authorities as set out in the judgment. In our opinion, once the very issue is subject matter of the petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the State of Maharashtra pursuant to the order dated 17.12.2009 has issued directions, in our opinion, it will not be proper to further proceed with the Sou Motu Petition initiated by this court. In that light, considering the matter is seized of by the Supreme Court, in so far as present petition is concerned, the same is treated as disposed of subject to whatever directions the Supreme Court may issue. (J.H. BHATIA,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.)