GANGABEN MOHANBHAI CHAUHAN Vs. ADAM HAJIBHAI SALOT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellants herein are the original petitioners who filed Claim Petition Nos. 1601 of 1998 and 1605 of 1998 before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rajkot against the respondents herein. The Claims Tribunal has rejected the Claim Petitions on the ground that it has no jurisdiction and in exercise of Rule 10 Order VII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 the Claim Petitions were ordered to be returned to the petitioners for presentation before the appropriate Tribunal having jurisdiction to try and decide the petitions filed by the petitioners.

(2.) HEARD learned Advocate for the petitioners and learned Advocate for respondent No. 5 the Insurance Company.

(3.) IT is not in dispute that the accident occurred somewhere near Wankaner. Though before the Tribunal at Rajkot a dispute was raised by the respondents as to the place of residence of the petitioners learned Advocate appearing for the Insurance Company submitted that if the petitioners are able to establish their place of residence by evidence in this regard, and give an undertaking to the Claims Tribunal that no other petitions have been preferred before any other Tribunal, the Insurance Company would not have any objection if the Claim Petitions are heard and tried on merits. Learned Advocate for the petitioners states that the petitioners shall produce evidence as to the place of residence of the petitioners and also file an undertaking before the Claims Tribunal to the effect that the petitioners have not lodged any claim before any other Tribunal, except the Claims Tribunal at Rajkot, and also that if subsequently the petitioners are found to have preferred any other claim before any other Tribunal in relation to this very accident the petitioners shall forfeit their right to proceed with the claim in the petitions.