1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.03.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE K.B.K.VASUKI Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.32 of 2011 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2011 Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance company Ltd., Buz Plaza, Lawsons Road, Trichy. ... Petitioner Vs. 1.S.Vijaya 2.R.Jebamani Ammal 3.V.Packia Rathi ... Respondents PRAYER: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, to withdraw the claim petition in M.C.O.P.No.1799 of 2010 from the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Fast Track Court-I), Trichy and transfer the same to the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (District Judge), Tuticorin to be tried along with M.C.O.P.No.90 of 2010. For Petitioner :Mr.S.Srinivasa Raghavan ORDER The learned counsel for the petitioner is present and is heard. 2. Though the respondents 1 & 2 herein/claimants who claim themselves to be the first wife and mother of one Sathya Sumuel Rajapandi, who is the fatal accident victim are duly served with notice in this Transfer Petition, they did not choose to make their appearance in person or through advocate. 3. No representation on behalf of the third respondent/first respondent in the claim petition. 4. The transfer sought for is to withdraw M.C.O.P.No.1799 of 2010 from the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Fast Track Court-I), Trichy and transfer the same to the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(District Judge), Tuticorin to be tried along with M.C.O.P.No.90 of 2010 which is pending at trial stage. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 5. According to the petitioner herein, both the claim petitions are arising out of the same accident, claiming compensation for the death of same person and the first claimant in M.C.O.P.No.1799 of 2010 and the sole claimant in M.C.O.P.No.90 of 2010 filed the claim petitions claiming to be the first and second wife respectively of the deceased Sathya Sumuel Rajapandi, without impleading the other party in the respective claim petitions. That being so, it is argued on behalf of the petitioner/Insurance Company that both the claim petitions, for proper and effective adjudication, to be tried by one and the same Court and in the event of the sane being tried by different Courts, it will lead to conflict of judgments regarding the marital status of the claimants in both the claim petitions resulting in multiplicity of proceedings. 6. The contentions raised on the side of the petitioner/Insurance Company contains merits and deserves acceptance. Hence, this Court is inclined to order joint trial of M.C.O.P.No.1799 of 2010 and M.C.O.P.No.90 of 2010 by one and the same Court and as trial in M.C.O.P.No.90 of 2010 is already commenced, it is but appropriate to transfer M.C.O.P.No.1799 of 2010 which is at the trial stage on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Fast Track Court-I), Trichy to the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(District Judge), Tuticorin to be tried along with M.C.O.P.No.90 of 2010 and the same is ordered only in the interest of the claimants in both the claim petitions and in order to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and the same will in no way prejudice the right of either of the claimants in both the claim petitions. 7. In the result, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is ordered and M.C.O.P.No.1799 of 2010 is withdrawn and transferred from the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Fast Track Court-I), Trichy to the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(District Judge), Tuticorin to be tried along with M.C.O.P.No.90 of 2010. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Deputy Registrar(LA) /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1.Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (Fast Track Court-I), Trichy. 2.The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (District Judge), Tuticorin +One Cc to Mr.S.SrinivasaRaghavan, Advocate, SR.No.6894 pm rl/4c – 9.4.2011 Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.32 of 2011 17.03.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/