NEETA JAIN Vs. RITESH KUMAR JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the order dated 12.02.2019 passed in Claim Case No. 143 of 2018 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bastar at Jagdalpur (C.G.), the Appellants/Claimants have preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. As per order dated 12.02.2019, the Tribunal has not accepted the claim petition of the Claimants only on the ground that the Claimants were residing at Geedam, District Dantewada and therefore, it would be convenient for the Claimants to file the claim petition before Dantewada Tribunal with this observation, the Tribunal returned the claim petition of the Claimants to present it before the competent Tribunal under Order 7 Rule 10 of CPC.

(2.) It is not disputed by the parties that the claim petition is filed before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bastar at Jagdalpur and the Claimants were residing at Geedam, District Dantewada and have chosen the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bastar at Jagdalpur because the office of Insurance Company/Respondent No. 3 is at Jagdalpur.

(3.) As per written statement of Insurance Company/non-applicant No.3, Insurance Company raised this question regarding territorial jurisdiction of Accident Claims Tribunal, Jagdalpur but no any issue framed by the Tribunal. When first time issues i.e. issues No. 1 to 4 were framed by the Tribunal on 15.01.2019, no any issue regarding territorial jurisdiction was framed by the concerned Tribunal. Thereafter, on 02.02.2019 one additional issue regarding territorial jurisdiction was framed by the Tribunal. Prior to framing of this additional issue by the Tribunal, three witnesses i.e. witness No.1 Neeta Jain, witness No. 2- Dheeraj Singh and witness No. 3 Ritesh Kumar Jain were examined on behalf of the Claimants and cross-examined by the non-applicants. Thereafter, the additional issue was framed and the claim petition was returned by Tribunal to file the same before appropriate Tribunal as order passed on 12.02.2019.