SHRI MAKTUM ATTAR SHAIKH & Anr. v. SHRI ASHOK LAXMAN NAIK AND 6 ORS
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 14 Feb 2007
- Bench
- S K SHAH
Outcome
Allowed
Therefore, the transfer application is allowed
Judgment
Operative part
SHRI MAKTUM ATTAR SHAIKH AND ANR., ....Applicants Versus SHRI ASHOK LAXMAN NAIK AND 6 ORS., ....Respondents Mr. Prasanna C. Chawdikar, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. E. Afonso, Advocate for the respondents No. 3 and 6 Coram:- S.K. SHAH, J. Date:- 14th February, 2007 P.C. Except the respondents No.3 and 6, the other respondents are not served. However, the Counsel representing the applicants and the respondents No.3 and 6 have submitted that this is an application for transfer of Claim Petition No.41/04 filed by respondent No.7 pending before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mapusa, Goa and be clubbed together with Claim Petition No.49/2004 pending before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, North Goa, at Panaji. They submit that both the cliam petitions arise out of the same accident, one is filed by the widow of the deceased and the other is filed by the parents of the deceased. Considering all these aspects of the matter, it is necessary that both the claim petitions shall be heard and decided by one Tribunal. Therefore, the transfer application is allowed. The Claim Petition No.41/04 filed by the respondent No.7 before the MACT at Mapusa Goa shall be transferred and clubbed together with Claim Petition No.49/04 which is pending before the MACT, North Goa, at Panaji. The application accordingly stands disposed of. ssm. S.K. SHAH, J.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Therefore, the transfer application is allowed
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 14 Feb 2007. The bench was S K SHAH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.