NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. KANTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) At the request of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.

(2.) The present writ petition is having identical facts as were the facts in SBWP No. 4217/2010 preferred by the same party New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and these two writ petitions have been preferred because of the reason that because of one of the accident occurred on 2-8-2008, two separate claim petitions were filed before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.l, Jodhpur by two separate set of claimants.

(3.) In both the claim cases by identical order, appellant's applications seeking leave to defend the claims were dismissed by the same Motor Accident Claim's Tribunal. Both the writ petitions were listed together before this Bench on 12-5-2010 and it was submitted by learned counsel for the parties that in the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.l, Jodhpur the recording of evidence is not in accordance with the rules and the Insurance Companies are even not normally permitted to cross-examine the witnesses of the claimants even on permissible grounds, whereas another Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in the city of Jodhpur itself takes evidence in detail in the language of the witnesses and permits the parties to cross-examine the witnesses. Therefore, in the writ petition No. 4217/2010 notices were issued to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 1, Jodhpur because of the reason that procedure adopted by the tribunal was questioned by the learned counsels for the parties.