APHC010260072024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3397] MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 195/2024 Between: 1. GIRIDI SAI SAILAJA, W/O.LATE GIRIDI MADHU KUMAR, C/O.GULIVENDULA SRINIVASA RAO, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, HOUSE NO.2-219, RAMA NAGAR, VENKATAPURAM, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT, EDMC, AP - 534001 ...PETITIONER AND 1. KURUKULA HEMANTH GOPI RAJU, , S/O.HARIBABU, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS. DRIVER OF TOURIST BUS BEARING NO.AP 39 VD 0656, NANDURU VILLAGE, PONNURU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, GDMC. 2. MANNEM BHANU, S/O.M.RAJU (LATE), AGED NOT KNOWN, OWNER OF TOURIST BUS BEARING NO.AP 39 VD 0656, HOUSE NO.8-152, SAI BABA GUDI AREA, PRASADAMPADU, VIJAYAWADA, VIJAYAWADA RURAL, NTR DISTRICT, VIJ-DMC, AP-521108 3. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, II FLOOR, GOVEMORPET, ALBAIG STREET, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, VIJ DMC, AP - 520002 4. K JAGADEESWARI GIRIDI JAGADEESWARI, W/O. NAGA RAJU, AGED 28 YEARS. HOUSE WIFE, RESIDENT OF D.NO.1-182, TURPUPETA, PARIMPUDI, VILLAGE, KOYYALAGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 5. GIRIDI RAMULU, S/O. KRISHNAMMA, AGED 77 YEARS. RESIDENT OF D.NO.1-182, TURPUPETA, PARIMPUDI VILLAGE. KOYYALAGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRI ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 may be pleased to withdraw MVOP No.251/2024 from the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Special Judge for SC and ST cases, Rajamahendravaram and transfer the same to the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Principal District Judge, Eluru to be tried along with MVOP No. 168/2024 and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in MVOP No.251/2024 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Special Judge for SC and ST cases, Rajamahendravaram, pending disposal of the above Transfer C.M.P and pass such other orders as may be just. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A VEERASWAMY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. G V SHIVAJI 2. The Court made the following: ORDER: The petitioner herein filed the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (for short ‘the C.P.C.’) seeking for withdrawal of M.V.O.P.No.251 of 2024 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal- cum-Special Judge for SC & ST cases, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District and transfer the same to the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal- cum-Principal District Judge, Eluru, West Godavari District, to be tried along with M.V.O.P.No.168 of 2024, for trial. 2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows: I. The petitioner/wife submits that, her husband Mr. Madhu Kumar, aged about 32 years, working as a driver and used to draw a salary of Rs.20,000/- per month. After marriage, the petitioner and her husband residing at Door No.5-182B, Koyyalagudem, West Godavari District. Out of their wedlock, they blessed with a girl child, but unfortunately, the said infant passed away at the age of five (05) months, due to severe ill health. II. The petitioner submits that on the midnight of 12.01.2024, while her husband along with another person was proceeded from Yadavole Village, Visakhapatnam with Van bearing registration No.AP39 UL 9995, with a load of Lemon. When they reached Jagananna Colony, Kapvaram Village, the van broke down due to a technical defect. They stopped the vehicle to the extreme left side of the road, duly taking all necessary precautions. At about 2:30 AM, on 13.01.2024, a tourist bus bearing No. AP 39 VD 0656, belonging to the 2nd respondent and driven by the 1st respondent in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the van bearing No. AP 39 UL 9995, resulting which the petitioner’s husband sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to the Community Health Centre, Kovvur, and thereafter on the advice of the doctors, he was further shifted to the Government General Hospital, Kakinada. Subsequently, he succumbed to the injuries on 19.01.2024, while undergoing treatment. III. The petitioner/wife further submits that, the Station House Officer, Kovvur Rural Police Station, registered a case in Crime No.15 of 2024 under Section 338 IPC, which was subsequently altered to Section 304-A IPC. IV. The petitioner/wife further submits that she filed M.V.O.P. No.168 of 2024 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Eluru, against the respondents herein, including the 3rd respondent/Insurance Company, claiming a sum of Rs.22,00,000/- towards compensation for the death of her husband. The said M.V.O.P. is pending and posted to 08.07.2024. While things stood thus, to the utter shock and surprise, she received a notice from the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal-cum- Special Judge for SC and ST Cases, Rajamahendravaram, in M.V.O.P.No.251 of 2024, wherein she was summoned to appear before the Court on 03.07.2024. On enquiry, the petitioner/wife came to know that her husband’s married sister had filed another petition vide M.V.O.P. No.251 of 2024, claiming compensation for the death of her husband in the very same road accident that occurred on 13.01.2024, and that the petitioner was impleaded as the 4th respondent in the said petition. It is further submitted that, it is evident from the said notice and the case status, the said petitioner (sister of the deceased) did not furnish her address or other personal details, and instead, her address was shown as that of her counsel appearing before the lower Court, as it is a Preventive Detention case and at the stage of issuance of notices. V. The petitioner/wife further submits that she being the Class- I heir and sole dependant of her deceased husband, and already M.V.O.P.No.168 of 2024 at Eluru, West Godavari District was filed, without her knowledge or consent, the married sister of her deceased husband filed another petition, M.V.O.P.No.251 of 2024, before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Special Judge for SC and ST Cases, Rajamahendravaram which is not maintainable. Both the petitions arise out of the very same accident and the deceased is none other than the husband of the petitioner. The cause of action is one and the same, the witnesses to be examined and the documents to be marked would also be common and therefore, it would be desirable that both the cases may be tried by one Court to avoid conflict of decisions. To prevent such a situation, the present petition is being filed seeking withdrawal of M.V.O.P.No.251 of 2024 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Special Judge for SC & ST cases, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District and transfer the same to the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Eluru, West Godavari District, to be tried along with M.V.O.P.No.168 of 2024. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing on both side counsels on record. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent would contend that the grounds mentioned in the present petition are not sufficient to consider the request made by the petitioners to withdraw the M.V.O.P.No.251 of 2024 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Special Judge for SC and ST Cases, Rajamahendravaram and transfer the same to the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Eluru, West Godavari District. He further submitted that, both the claims i.e., M.V.O.P.No.251 of 2024 & M.V.O.P.No.168 of 2024 arose out of the same accident. 5. The contention of the petitioner is that, she being a Class-I heir of the deceased filed M.V.O.P.No.168 of 2024 at Eluru, West Godavari District, against the respondents including the respondent No.3/Insurance Company against the death of her husband. The petitioner claimed that after filing the claim petition, the married sister of her husband, filed another claim petition vide M.V.O.P.No.251 of 2024, claiming compensation, for the very same death. 6. The only contention of the petitioner is that being a Class-I heir of her deceased husband field M.V.O.P.No.168 of 2024, which is pending before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Eluru, West Godavari District. It is also noticed that, subsequent to filing of the claim application by the petitioner, as state supra, the married sister of deceased filed M.V.O.P.No.251 of 2024, before the from the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Special Judge for SC and ST Cases, Rajamahendravaram. 7. In fact, both the claims arose out of the same accident, the cause of action in both the cases are one and the same, the other witnesses to be examined and documents to be marked in both the cases are common. Therefore, with a view to avoid conflict of decisions, both the cases should be tried together. 8. For the aforesaid reasons, I am of the considered view that the objections taken by the respondent are not sustainable and there are justifiable grounds to consider the request made by the petitioner/wife herein seeking for withdrawal M.V.O.P.No.251 of 2024 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Special Judge for SC & ST cases, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District and transfer the same to the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-Principal District Judge, Eluru, West Godavari District. 9. Accordingly, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending and the Interim Order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO Date: 15.09.2025 CVD