THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V. SEETHAPATHY M.A.C.M.A. NO.1943 OF 2010 DATED:08.11.2011 Between: Vankayala Bharathi and others … Appellants And Lalith Patel and others … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V. SEETHAPATHY M.A.C.M.A. NO.1943 of 2010 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the order dt.22.3.2007 in M.V.O.P. No.1515 of 2003, on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (District Judge), Khammam, wherein the said petition filed by the petitioners herein claiming compensation of Rs.11,00,000/- for the death of the deceased Vankayala Prabhakar Rao, was dismissed. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants. None appeared for the respondents though served with notice. Perused the record. A perusal of the impugned order would show that the petition as against respondent No.1, driver of the offending lorry, was dismissed as not pressed on 20.4.2004, and as the appellants – claimants failed to pay the process fee for respondent No.2, the owner of the lorry, the claim as against respondent No.2 was dismissed on 11.10.2004. The claimants filed I.A.No.1703 of 2006 for condoning the delay in filing the application for setting aside the default dismissal order. The said I.A. No.1703 of 2006 was dismissed on 2.2.2007 for non-payment of process fee. The claimants filed a revision in C.R.P. No.2081 of 2007 before this Court and by order dt.10.8.2007, this Court granted an opportunity to the claimants to pay the process fee within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order and directed the Tribunal to take further steps accordingly. It appears, there was no interim order of stay of further proceedings before the Tribunal during the pendency of the Civil Revision Petition and therefore, on 22.3.2007, the O.P. came to be dismissed on the ground that the claim against the respondents 1 and 2 was already dismissed and therefore there was no contractual liability on the part of respondent No.3 – insurer to indemnify. In the circumstances, as this court by order dt.10.8.2007 in C.R.P. No.2081 of 2007 has already granted an opportunity to the claimants to pay the process fee and the matter be disposed of on merits, it is considered to be a fit case for fresh disposal in accordance with law after giving notice to the respondents. The impugned order is accordingly set aside and the matter is remanded to the Court below. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _______________________ G.V. SEETHAPATHY, J 08.11.2011 bnr