IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 12TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 21ST KARTHIKA 1931 Tr.P(C).No. 230 of 2009() --------------------------------------- OPMV.1683/1997 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... PETITIONER: (S) ------------------------ JACOB THOMAS @ SHAJU, KOSAMATTOM HOUSE, MANNARCAD. BY ADV.MR.M.M.MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., REP.BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, KOTTAYAM. * R2 IS IMPLEADED 2. MR.V.C.SOMAN, ERAVUKERIL HOUSE, CHENGALAM SOUTH P.O., KOTTAYAM. * R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT. 24/9/2009 IN IA. 2908/2009. THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------- Tr.P.C.No.230 of 2009 - O --------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of November, 2009 O R D E R Petition is filed for transfer under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Petitioner is the applicant in O.P.(MV).No.1683 of 1997 on the file of the MACT, Kottayam. He suffered multiple fractures in a road accident involving a motor vehicle which is insured with the respondent. Consequent to the injury sustained it is stated that his right hand from shoulder joint was amputed. The Tribunal had previously passed an award granting an amount of Rs.1,49,000/- and an appeal was preferred against that award by the applicant. The award was set aside and the case remitted to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. The claim of compensation raised in the petition is Rs.40 Lakhs and reasonable chances of settlement of the case fixing just compensation is not possible at Kottayam since the officer of the respondent, insurance company at that place is incompetent to settle any case beyond a certain limit fixed by the company, witnesses to be examined in the case, more particularly, the expert deoctors are all from Ernakulam, who find it difficult to go over to Kottayam, are some of the reasons canvassed for transfer of the petition to a Tribunal at Ernakulam. Tr.P.C.No.230 of 2009 2 2. Petitioner was directed to implead the owner of the vehicle as a party in the petition. Though notice was given on the impeading petition the owner has not entered appearance. 3. Having regard to the submissions made and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented, I find the transfer of the claim petition to a Tribunal at Ernakulam, is essential to advance the the ends of justice. The nature of injuries suffered by the petitioner in the accident and the pendency of the claim petition for the last more than 11 years, the witnesses to be examined, if it is found essential, in case there is no settlement possible, are from Ernakulam all indicate that the request for transfer has to be granted. So much so, O.P.(MV).No.1683 of 1997 on the file of the MACT, Kottayam is ordered to be transferred to the MACT, Ernakulam. The transferee Tribunal on receipt of the records shall issue notice to the respondents for appearance and also make every endeavour, once service is complete, for an expeditious disposal of the claim petition. Transfer petition is disposed of as above. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. bkn/-