1 wp 6763.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6763 OF 2011 The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. .. Petitioner Versus Meenakshi Pandurang Agalave and others .. Respondents Shri S. M. Godsay, Advocate for the Petitioner. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 08TH SEPTEMBER, 2011. PER COURT : . The present respondent/original claimant filed motor accident claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Osmanabad. The present petitioner filed written statement. Amongst other defences one of the defence is that the Tribunal at Osmanabad does not have jurisdiction. Thereafter the parties went on trial. The claimant filed her examination in chief and was cross examined. The present petitioner filed an application for treating the issue of jurisdiction as a preliminary issue. The said application is rejected. Aggrieved thereby the 2 wp 6763.11 present writ petition is filed. 2. Shri Godsay, the learned counsel submits that the claimant in her evidence has categorically admitted that she is residing at Pune, serving at Pune, the accident took place within the jurisdiction of Pune, even the insurance policy was purportedly obtained from the office at Pune. As such, the Tribunal at Osmanabad ex-facie did not have the jurisdiction. In such circumstances, the Court ought to have decided the issue of jurisdiction as a preliminary issue that would save the time of the Court and the litigant. 3. The Court has observed that the matter is at the stage of evidence. It is desirable that all the issues are decided together. In view of the fact that the parties have already started the evidence and the claimant has also been cross examined. I do not feel it appropriate to entertain the petition and direct the Tribunal to frame the issue of jurisdiction as preliminary issue that would also not be as per the scheme and procedure for deciding the claim petition under the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal’s Act. The Tribunal in para 10 of its order has observed as under : 3 wp 6763.11 “It is pertinent to note that issues are framed at Exh. 20 by me, however issue regarding jurisdiction is not framed. Hence, issue is framed as to whether this tribunal has jurisdiction to try the petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act ?" 4. In view of above it appears from the order that the Tribunal has directed to frame the issue of jurisdiction. The Trial Court shall decide all the issues together including the issue of jurisdiction at the time of final disposal of the claim petition. If issue of jurisdiction is not framed then the petitioner is at liberty to file such application, which the Tribunal would consider the same on its own merits. The writ petition is disposed of. No costs. [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] bsb/Sept. 11