GOPAL GAJANAN BHINGARE Vs. VINOD KUMAR B PUROHIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) When the case was taken up we find as per office report that in spite of notice none appears for the respondents.

(2.) The petitioner seeks transfer of Motor accident Claim Petition Nos. 428 of 1994 (Gopal Gajanan Bhingare v. Vinod Kumar babubhai Purohit) , 426 of 1994 (Minor manoj Gopal Gajanan Bhingare v. Vinod kumar Babubhai Purohit) and 427 of 1994 (Shobhaben Gopalbhai Bhingare v. Vinod kumar Babubhai Purohit) pending before motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Nasik (Maharashtra) to Motor Accidents Claims tribunal, Surat (Gujarat). The ground for the transfer is that after the incident the petitioner is crippled due to injury and it is difficult for him to move with his injured wife and handicapped child. The ground is also that most of the evidence is from surat and all the parties including respondents are residing in Surat. The insurance company has also a branch at Surat. On these un-controverted facts, as the respondents have not appeared to contest, we feel on the facts and circumstances of the case, a fit case to transfer the aforesaid cases from MACT, Nasik to MACT, Surat, Gujarat. Accordingly, the transfer petitions are allowed with no costs. The Tribunal at nasik will transmit the records, if any, to motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Surat, gujarat. Petitions allowed.