PROVASH CHANDRA BAIDYA Vs. SRI PRADIP SIKDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though the re-visional application is at the motion stage and since no notice was served till date upon the opposite parties - the owner of the alleged offending vehicle and New India Assurance Company Limited, considering the very character of such application this court observes that the order impugned itself is palpably illegal and perverse which does not call for keeping such application pending for any other purpose, save and except its disposal right now.

(2.) The application under Article 227 of the Constitution has been directed assailing Order No.27 dated March 10, 2016 passed by learned Judge, Motor Accidents' Claims Tribunal, Diamond Harbour dismissing Misc. Case No.11 of 2011 arose out of MACC Case No.470 of 2009.

(3.) Heard Mr Chattopadhyay representing the petitioners and perused the materials on record and the impugned order.