KALAIVANI Vs. R SHARMILA RANGARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Inveighing the order dated 3.2.2010, passed in M.C.O.P. No. 386 of 2006 by the learned Principal District Judge, Erode, this civil revision petition is focused.

(2.) Despite printing the name of R4, insurance company, no one has appeared. R1 to R3 were given up on the groupd that they remained ex parte before the lower court.

(3.) The revision petitioners herein who happened to be the claimants in M.C.O.P. No. 386 of 2006 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Erode, filed the said claim petition seeking compensation in connection with the death of the husband of the petitioner No. 1 and father of the revision petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 therein. However, the Tribunal after hearing the objection of the insurance company passed order returning the said petition on the ground that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the same, as according to the Tribunal, the petitioners could not establish that they are the permanent residents within the territorial jurisdiction of the said Tribunal.