• BEFQRE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT C.R. N0. BILASPUR OF 2005. APPLICANT •-NON-APPLICANT No. NON-APPLICANTS CIVIL REVISJ :-.,' Braach Maaaeer. For United India ^' ' '-'' - Insurance Company Limited, Address 68 Indira Commercial Complex, T.P. Nagar, Korba, Distriet KLorba (C.G.). VERSUS S:- 1. Smt. Puraima Dutta,aged about 31 yrs., Wife ofLate Narrottam Dutta, ^' '^l.Mmoi Akshit Dutta, aged about 7 ,--/ years, son o£ Late Narrottam Dutta, Through his mother aad Legal guardian Smt. Pumima Dutta, Both resideat ofPlot No. 111, Near Water Tank, Kosabadi, Korba, District Korba (Chhattisgarh), 3. Branch Manager, For National Insurance Co. Ltd., Address Minu Complex, Kosabadi, Korba, District Korba (Ghhattisgarh). NON-APPLICANT N0. 2 UNDER SECTIONllS OF CODE OF CIVIL XI-HC-22 'T5?'::iIPII?PT, »TJ1«'llo,fiK-tl^y. ®H^T'ira^? ^ > ..C...R.:.N.G,S^Pi5' ••^"loo *<l<«'(Tch*<|ch 31KHW R'fii* sn^i ^?ffci^ ^I^T sn^i^RiWBfOT 27.06.2005 Shri H. B. Agrawal, Senior Ad\ Advoaate for the applicant. Shri AA. K Baid, counset for the Heard on admission. Sec+ions3and 115(1) of the\ " 3- Subordination of this Code, Ihe Distr\ to ihe High Court ani^ gi-ade inferior to that every Coupt of Small ifie High Courtand Oi^ of Gpurts- 115-W The High record of any case whif wiy Court subordinate\ in which no appeal //^s subordinate Courtapp^ars aj to have exerci^ vested initbylaw, or b) to have failed t^ so yested, o <ftl4i<:'f^U ^Tffil^ ^ f®<<^^9l¥g:R ^ Sifigii an^[ jscate with Smt Sangeeta Mishra, •espondents. 'PC read as below : tSjpurts- For the purpose tct Court is a^jordmate every Civil Court of a }pfa District Court and iJouses is subordinal'e to f-nct Court. "ourt may call for the di has been decided by to such High Court and s thereto. and if such •ed a Jurisd'iction not exercise a Jurisdiction fi$S [Tfr^ ^&^ ^ } \ ^ \ •8 KS 'S^ •^M\v\'^, »Au'i6,(sKti'yy WtRIItRWqi sr. •ai^i^i K;-<i.<* siisSr wiwgltg aTRWTOirwHfer c) to have acted Jurisdiction illegalty irregularity. <h the exercise of its or wi+h material 1fie High Court may i^ake such ordev in the case as it thinks fit" AAotor Accidents Claims Tr| Section 165 of the Motor Vehicle prasided over by judicial officers, under a special enactment, in view tribunal does not come within the ecji purpose of C.P.C-, and Section 115 o1[ C.P.C., does not attract to orders The petition is not maintainab ct)!<ild'4ii TH?RfE* ^ 'fe1^ <f<'f<^.l< ^raiPgHsn^i Ibunals are constituted under 4ct. Although 1+iese tr-ibunais ore but being 01 tribunal constituted |of Section'3 of the C.P.C., such ifice of subordinate Court for the it. Therefore, Section 115 of the pa^sed by the claims tribunal. s, hence it is dismissed. ^^ ~ '••^ Sd/- V.K-SImvastava Judge h