JOSHI RAJENDRAKUMAR POPATLAL Vs. THAKOR RAMNAJI HAMIRJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocate Mr.Gadhvi for the appellant. Respondent though duly served, has remained absent. Perused the record.

(2.) It is undisputed fact that the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal has failed to realize the basic principle of Civil Jurisprudence, more particularly, not only his statutory judicial power but duties and responsibilities as an Officer of the Tribunal under the M.V. Act.

(3.) The appellant herein is original claimant in Motor Accident Claims Petition No.259/2012 (old No.81/2004) before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mehsana. Whereas respondent Nos.1 to 4 are original respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 5 amongst which respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 are respectively driver, owner and insurer of one of the motor vehicle involved in the accident being jeep No.GAQ-5651. Whereas, respondent No.4 is insurer of another vehicle involved in the accident being motor cycle No.GAD-3907 which is owned and driven by the claimant himself which has been deleted before the Tribunal.