ABHESINH BHUPATSINH CHAUHAN Vs. IQBALHUSSAIN SIDIQBHAI MANVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocate, Mr. R.K. Mansuri for the petitioner. Though rule is served on the respondents, nobody appears.

(2.) The petitioner is the original claimant of MACP No. 9 of 2002 filed before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sabarkantha at Himatnagar. Said petition was dismissed for default as the petitioner was not present on the relevant date fixed for hearing. The petitioner preferred application for restoration of the main claim petition under Order IX Rule 9 of CPC along with an application for condonation of delay. However, said application was dismissed vide order dated 18.10.2011 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Modasa, District Sabarkantha in C.M.A. No. 168 of 2010. Hence, the present Special Civil Application is preferred by the petitioner.

(3.) Although process was duly served, respondents did not remain present cither personally or through advocate. Hence, the following order was passed by the Court (Coram: Anant S. Dave, J.) on 6.8.2012: