Allowed

Cholamandalam Ms General v. Mrs.Y.Vijayakumari

Madras HC20 Dec 2018TR CMP/268/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a transfer petition under Section 24 CPC to move a Motor Accident Claim Petition from Kancheepuram to Madurantakam Tribunal for joint hearing to prevent conflicting decisions on the same accident, noting the respondents' non-appearance.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of M.C.O.P.No.739 of 2016 from Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kancheepuram to Madurantakam for joint trial.

Cholamandalam Ms General Vs Mrs.Y.Vijayakumari — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 20.12.2018

¶2

CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.PONGIAPPAN

¶3

Tr.C.M.P.No.268 of 2018 and C.M.P.No.6763 of 2018

¶4

Cholamandalam MS General Insurance
Company Limited,
Regd. & Head Office,
Dare House, 2nd Floor,
No.2, NSC Bose Road,
Chennai - 600 001. ..Petitioner
versus
1.Y.Vijayakumari
2.Arunthathi [Minor]
3.Hasini [Minor]
4.Hariharan [Minor]
[Respondents 2 to 4 Minors represented
by their Guardian and mother
Y.Vijayakumari]
All are residing at
Eswaran Koil Street,
Arasanimangalam Village & Post,
Uthiramerur Taluk,Kancheepuram.
5.S.Murugan
6.Hari
7.Kumar ..Respondents
[R-7 impleaded as per order
dated 20.04.2018 made in
C.M.P.No.7764/2018 in Tr.CMP.No.268/2018]

¶5

Prayer: Petition is filed under Section 24 of C.P.C., to withdraw M.C.O.P.No.739 of 2016 pending on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kancheepuram and transfer the same to the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Madurantakam, to be tried along with the Petition in M.C.O.P.No.98 of 2015 pending on its file.

¶6

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶7

O R D E R

¶8

This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure to withdraw M.C.O.P.No.739 of 2016 pending on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kancheepuram and transfer the same to the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Madurantakam, to be tried along with the Petition in M.C.O.P.No.98 of 2015 pending on its file.

¶9

The petitioner is the Insurance Company. All the respondents have filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, in which, they are claiming compensation. The said petition is now pending with the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kancheepuram in M.C.O.P.No.739 of 2016. In the said circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court with this present petition, seeking the relief to transfer the above said M.C.O.P. to the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Madurantakam, for joint trial along with M.C.O.P.No.98 of 2015.

¶10

According to the petitioner, the seventh respondent in this petition has filed one another claim petition for the same accident, which is now pending with the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Madurantakam in M.C.O.P.No.98 of 2015. In both the petitions, the parties to the proceedings and the alleged accident are one and the same. Unless both the O.Ps. are heard together and decided jointly, there will be a chance for coming out the conflicting decision. In the said circumstances, the petitioner has come out with the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition for the relief stated earlier in the first paragraph of this order.

¶11

In respect to the respondents, despite of several notices received, all the respondents have not appeared before this Court either in person or through counsel. For the above said reason, this Court on 13.12.2018 directed the registry to post the matter under the caption "for orders". Today [20.12.2018], even after printing the name of the parties in the cause list, there is no representation on behalf of them either in person or through counsel.

¶12

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also perused the materials available on record.

¶13

Now, considering the prayer sought for by the petitioner, it is true that the accident pertaining to both claim petitions viz. M.C.O.P.No.739 of 2016 and M.C.O.P.No.98 of 2015 are one and the same and hence, for disposing the both claim petitions ordering for joint trail or simultaneous trial is very much helpful to the parties in participating the court proceedings. Further, if the said petitions are tried in

¶14

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

different courts there may be a chance for coming out the conflicting decision. That apart, the distance between Kancheepuram and Madurantakam is nearly 50 kms. Further, non appearance of the respondents would show that they are not having any objection to allow this petition.

¶16

In the light of the above discussion, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. Accordingly, the petition in M.C.O.P.No.739 of 2016 is ordered to be withdrawn from the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kancheepuram and transferred to the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Madurantakam. It is left open to the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal to decide for joint trail or for simultaneous trial. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kancheepuram, is directed to transmit all the records pertaining to M.C.O.P.No.739 of 2016 to the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Madurantakam, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of records, the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Madurantakam, is directed to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶17

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar sri To 1.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kancheepuram. 2.The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Madurantakam. +1cc to Mr.N.Vijayaraghavan, Advocate, S.R.No.89874 Tr.C.M.P.No.268 of 2018 and C.M.P.No.6763 of 2018 RR(CO) RRS(30/01/2019)

¶18

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Cholamandalam Ms General v. Mrs.Y.Vijayakumari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cholamandalam Ms General v. Mrs.Y.Vijayakumari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs Unnamalai Vs Jayakodi

Sudha Vs M. Maraiyarasu

Priyanga M Vs K.Deepakdurai

R.Abinaya Devi Vs C.Rajeshkumar

Anbarasi Vs Venkatesan

P.Anusuya Vs K.Venkatesan @ Suresh