Claimants Entitled to Costs and Interest Following APSRTC's Withdrawal of Appeal
The Andhra Pradesh High Court, presided over by Justice A. Hari Haranadha Sarma, delivered a significant judgment on March 13, 2026, in the case of APSRTC v. Smt. P. Jyothi Chittoor Dt and Others. The court addressed the procedural aspect concerning the withdrawal of appeals under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and awarded costs to the respondents, along with interest.
The appeal stemmed from a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) decision, where APSRTC was ordered to pay a compensation of Rs. 4,79,194, exceeding the original claim of Rs. 4,00,000. APSRTC, dissatisfied with the award, initially appealed against the liability and quantum of compensation. However, during the proceedings, APSRTC expressed its intention to withdraw the appeal unconditionally.
The respondents, representing the claimants, argued that the appellate court should still examine the compensation's just and adequate nature. They contended that the appeal's withdrawal should not impede the court's ability to assess the compensation, given the social welfare nature of the Motor Vehicles Act.
The court analyzed the provisions under Order XXIII and Order XLI of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), which govern the withdrawal and disposal of suits and appeals. The judgment clarified that while the CPC allows for withdrawal of appeals, this is not explicitly restricted by the Motor Vehicles Act or its rules. The court concluded that the respondents could not insist on a merit-based disposal of the appeal in the absence of cross-objections or a cross-appeal.
Justice Sarma emphasized that APSRTC's decision to withdraw the appeal, without pursuing a merit-based resolution, could not be contested by the respondents. However, the court acknowledged the respondents' incurred costs due to their appearance in the appeal proceedings. Consequently, the court awarded the claimants Rs. 5,000 as costs, with interest at 6% per annum, calculated from the date of their appearance in court until the deposit date.
This judgment reaffirms the procedural rights of appellants under the CPC while ensuring that respondents are not financially burdened by withdrawals. The court's decision highlights the balance between procedural law and the social welfare objectives of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Bottom line:-
In an appeal filed under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, withdrawal of the appeal by the appellant is permissible, and respondents cannot insist on disposal of the appeal on merits in the absence of cross-objections or a cross-appeal.
Statutory provision(s): Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 173, Order XXIII CPC, Order XLI CPC, Section 34 CPC
APSRTC v. Smt. P. Jyothi Chittoor Dt, (Andhra Pradesh) : Law Finder Doc id # 2866819
