The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the-affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in M.V.o.P No. 1143 of 2024 on the file of Hon'ble MACT cum Chief Judge City Civil Court at Hyderabad Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KODARI MALLIKARJUN CounselfortheRespondentNos.l&2:SRIJAGATHPALREDDYKASIREDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI A. RAMA KRISHNA REDDY TRA NS. CIVIL MlS, Between: 1 Babu Sunitt a, W/o. Babu Rajaiah (Aged about 48 years, Occupation- 2 Household Babu Ra.jaiah, S/o. B.Chenamallu, Aged about 53 years, C'ccupation-Nil (Both are res idents of Katapally village, shyampet Mandal, warangal District) iresently residing at H.No.2-3-697, New Thirumal Nagar, Amberpet, Hyderabad. .. PETITIONER/CLAIMANTS lN O' P'No' 1 1 43 ol 2O24 AND 1 . Gorre Harish, S/o.Raiaiah, Aged about 26 years, Occupation-Entployee Resident of I'larasingapur Venkatapur Mandal, Munugu District' Prqsently residing at H No ' -27 Chelpur, ganpur Mandal, Jayashankar District' ...RESPONDENT NO.1 AND CLAIMANT O.P.No.S ot 2024;tnd 6 ol 2O24

2. Nagnath lrrlar oti rl/aghmode, S/o.Maruti Waghmode, Aged-lvlajor, Occupation- Driver R/o.SIt No 1336, Maan Bodkewadi Tal, Mulshi' Pure. Maharashtra state412 10r1.

3. The Tata AI(i General Insurance Company Limited' Representerl by its Divisional Marnager, H.No.7'1-6-617lA, GHMC No.61 5, 5th (Part) & 6th Floor, lmperial Tower, Ameerpet, Hyderabad-sO0.O16. ...RES'ONDENTS Petition Under section 24 ol the c.P.c. Praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleasr:d to transfer M V.O.P No. 5 of 2O24, on the file of Honorable MACT- cum- District Judge, Jayashankar Bhul>alapally to the Hon'ble Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and to clubr the above said M.V.O.P-NO. 5 of 20213' with M V O P No.1 143 of 2O24. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI JAGATHPAL REDDY KASI REDDY Counsel forthe Respondent No.l: SRI KODARI MALLIKARJUN Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI A. RAMA KRISHNA REDDY lr -L TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO i 470 0F 2024 Between: 1 2 Babu Sunitha, Wo. Babu Rajaiah, Aged about 48 years, Occupation. Household. Babu Rajaiah, S/o. B.Chenamallu, Aged about 53 years, Occupation. Nil (Both are residents of Katapafiy Viilage, shyampet tvtanoat, warangar District) Presently residing at H.No.2-3-697, New Thirumal Nagar, -Rmberpet, Hyderabad. ...PETIT|ONER/CLATMANTS tN O. p.No.1 1 43 ot 2024 AND 1 Gorre Harish, S/o.Rajaiah, Aged about 26 years, Occupation. Employee Resident of Narasingapur village, Venkatapur Mandal, Munugu District. Presently residing at H.No.'t-27 Chelpur, ganpur Mandal, Jayishankar District. ...RESPONDENT NO.1 AND CLAIMANT O.p.No. 6 of 2024 2 J lqqatn Maroti Waghmode, S/o.Maruti Waghmode, Aged.Major, OCCUpation. Driver R/o.SR No.1336, Maan Bodkewadi Tal, Mulshi, pune, Maharashtra state412 "l 08. The Tata AIG General lnsurance Company Limited, Represented by its Divisional Manager H.No.7-1-6-617lA, GHMC No.615 Sths (part) and 6th floor, lmperial Tower, Ameerpet, Hyderabad-s0O 016 ...RESPONDENTS Petition Under Section 24 of the c.p-c. praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,the High court may be pleased to transfer M.v-o.P No. 6 of 2024 on the fire of Honbre MAiT cum District Judge, Jayashankar Bhupatapalty to the Honble chief Judge, city civil court, Hyderab-ad and to club the above said O.p with tvl.V.O.p No.i 143 of 2024. Gounsel for the Petitioner: SRt JAGATHPAL REDDY KASI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI KODARI MALLIKARJUN Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI A. RAMA KRISHNA REDDY The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER HON'B]-E SRI IUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA AI,ISHETTY TR.C.M.P.NOs. 350 468 AND 470 0F 2024 COMMON ORDER: -Ir.CMF No.350 of 2024 is filed under Section 24 oi thc CPC' 1908' by tlre petitio rer, who is respondent No 3 in MVOP No 1113 of 2024' seeking to wihdrar.v MVOP No.1143 of 2024 on the file oi rhe MACT- cum-Chief Juilge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad and transfr'rr the same to the MAC-'-ctttn-PrinciPal District judge, Jayashankar llhupalpalli district at Bhr- Pala PallY.

2.Tr.CN{l,Nos.il68of2024and4TOof2O24arefilerluncerSection 24 of the CP l, t'108, by the petitioners, seeking to rvithdlaw MVOP Nos.5&6af2024,respectivelv,onthefileoftheMACf-curn-Principal DistrictJudgtatJavashankarBhupalpallyandtransferthe.;atnetothe MACT-cum-(lhit:l'Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad antl to club the MVOP Nos.5 anrl 6 of 2024 alongwith MVOP No.1143 t-f 201':4'

3. Since tlre issue involved in all these matters is one and the same, all the Tr.Clv'Ps rvere heard together and disposed of by tlLis common order.

4. For cot rvenience, the facts in TT.CMP No.46B of 2021 lre referred hereunder 2 (i) Gorre Manasa (hereinaf ter referred to as cieceased) is Lhe daughter of petitioners and respondent No.1 is the husband of deceased; that deceased expired in a road accident that occurred on

79.72.2023 near Ram Honda Showroom, Narsapur Cross Roads, Balanagar, Hyderabad, while she was proceeding as pillion Rider along with her husband (respondent No.1), on motorcycle bearing regishation No.TS-37-0136 and at that time, DCM Van bearing regisLrarion No.MH_ l4-KA-4315 (hereinafter referred to as 'crime vehicle') came with high speed and dashed their motorcycre, due to which, deceased diecr on the spot. The Police, P.S.Balanagar, Cyberabad registeretl a case in Crime No.563 of 2023 under section 304-4 against the driver of crime vehicle. (ii) Petitioners filed MVOp No.1143 of 2024 for compensation on account of death of their deceased daughter before the MACT_cum_ Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad. (iii) Respondent No.1 also filed MVOP Nos.5 and 6 of 2024 for compensation on account of death of his deceased wife and death of unborn child, respectively, on the file of MACT-cum-principal District Judge at Jaya Shankar Bhupalpally. (iv) Respondent No.1 has filed Tr.CMp No.350 of 2024 to transfer the MVOPJTIo .1743 oI 2024 on the file of MACT-cum-Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad to the MACT-cum-principat District Judge at -r' t 3 Jaya Shankar lihup,alpally to club and try the said MVOI'] along with IWOP Nos.5 and 6 of 2024. (v) \.4rhereas, petitioners filed Tr'CMP Nos'368 and 470 * 2024 on the file of V.r'(l l -cum-Principal District Judge at Ia vashankar Bhupalpally tc tra rsfer the MVOP Nos 5 and 6 of 2024 to the MACT- cum-Chief Judge, {Jity Civil Court, Hyderabad to try aiong w ith MVOP No.1l43 of 2024

5. Learned ccttnsel for petitioners had contended that in MVOP NOs.S and 6 o 202.4, the address of the respondent No 1 was mentioned as H.No.8-1 - 49 I E I 2, Prasuna Nagar, Chinthal' I-iyclerabad and temporarily r esi<ling at Ghanpur village and manclal' Jt Lyashankar Bhupaipally ( isb'ict and thus, filed ttre above two MVOPs before the MACT-cum'Frin,:'pal District Judge at Jayashankar Bhupaipally' It is further conte rclecl tha t respondent No 1 is a private em1>loyee and residing in L ycl,:rabad and the accident had occurred at Balanagar' Hyderabad; t rat 'retitioners who are the parents of the de:eased' are residing at F yderabad and filed MVOP No'1143 of 2024 before the MACT-cum-( -hit:I Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad' for compensatir:r on account of death of their deceased daughter and the respondent N o..l 'vas made party to the said proceedings' 4 4 (

6. It is further contended that the respondent No.1 filed MVOp Nos.5 and 6 of 2024 before the MACT-cum_prl.District Judge, Jayashankar Bhupalpally, without making the petitioners as parties to the said MVOPs in order to avoid payment of compensation to them. It is further contended that since all three MVops arise out of the same accident, it is appropriate to club all the ma tters and try together and decide the issues for proper adjudication of the matters and aiso to avoid confiict decisions. It is finally prayed to withdraw the MVOp Nos.5 and 6 of 2024 on the file of MACT-cum-prl.Dishict Judge at Jayashankar Bhupalpally and transfer the same to the Court of Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and club the MVOp Nos.5 & 6 of 2025 alongwith MVOp No.1143 of 2024.

7. Hearci Sri K.Jagathpal Reddy, learned counsel for petitioners in TT.CMP Nos.468 and 470 of 2024 and Sri A.Ramakrishna Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent No.3-insurance company is present and contended that it is appropriate to club all the matters, try together and decide the issue by the same Court to avoid conflicting decisions. No representation on behalf of the petitioner in TT.CMP No.350 o12024.

8. On perusal of the record, it appears that respondent No.1 and the deceased are husband and wife and the deceased expired in a road acciderrt that took place on 79.12.2023; that respondent No.1 filed two -/ l MVOPs, c ne lor compensation on account of death oi deceased wife and anotLer on account of death of unborn child before the MACT- cum-Prirrc ipaI District Judge at Jayashankar Bhupalpally and in the said applicatio rs. l', is pertinent to note that the Parents of thr: deceased i.e., petitionen ha ve not been made as parties to the sait I proceedings tr\rhereas, n I\{VOP No.1143 ot2024 filed by the parents of deceased, the responder t i..\o.1 was made a party respondent No.3

9. Frorn the record, it is evident that road accidenl: took place at Balanagar l{i,c1n.ubud and the l'olice, Balanagar P.S., rel3istered a case against th: driver of the crime vehicle and the distanc e between the Hyderaba I a'rd Jayashankar Bhupalpally is fal arnray and 'also considerir g th,,. fact that the respondent No.1 is a Permanent resident of Hyderaba i, rvhich is evident from the address mcntio ned in MVOP Nos.5 and 6 of 2024, and the parents of the deceased are resident of Hyderaba I ard are also old aged persons

10. Fror n the above facts and circumstances of the l:ases and also consideri-r g the fact that the parents of the deceaseci are old aged, this Court is < f the considered view that all the ma tiers to be tried and decided b , th<: MACT-cum-Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, { I which is < orr',2:nient to all the parties to the proceedini;s and also to avoid conllict of decisions and therefore, this Court is inctined to accede 6 \ to the request of the parents of the deceased i.e., petitioners in MVOp No.1143 of 2024

11. Accordingly, Tr.C.M.p.Nos.46g and 470 of 2024 are allowed and MVOp Nos.5 and 6 of 2024, pending on rhe file of the MACT_ cum-Principal DisLrict Judge at Jayashankar Bhupalpally, are withdrawn and transferred to the file of the learned MACT_cum_ Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad to be hied along with MACT No.1143 of 2024 in accordance with law. Consequently, Tr.CMI, No.350 of 2024 is dismissed. 12. The learned MACT_cum_principal District Judge at. Jaya Shankar Bhupalpally, shall transmit the entire original records in MVOP Nos.5 and 6 of 2024 duly indexed, to the Court of the learned MACT-cum-Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad, preferably withh a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this

73. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed There shall be no order as to costs //TRUE COPY// Sd/- A.V.S. P ASSISTANT REGI SAD RAR SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The MACT cum Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad 2. The MACT Cum Principal District Judge, Jaishankar Bupalapalli District At Bhupalapally.

3. One CC to Sri Kodari Mallikarjun, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri A. Rama Krishna Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Sri Jagathpal Reddy Kasi Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 1, I13 cD coPies (+ i.if-E'7F: HIGH COUF:T DATED:1010'212025 COMMON ORDER TRCMP.Nos.350,468 and 470 of 2024 ,--, r,c S-ia f€ J\x + o ,J * 01 .rri Zms v C, .^s.4- ALLOWING THE TR.C.M.P. Nos. 468 AND 470 OF 2024 AND DISMISSING THE TR.C.M,P.No.350 OF 2024. fe- ;22 5 g,5 . .-1. - . . !:, i.:i&;r' :'