Vizzapu Ramanaji Rao v. K.P. Natarajan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED :

Coram THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN Civil Revision Petition No.2914 of 2024 1.Vizzapu Ramanaji Rao 2.Vizzapu Satyavathi ..... Petitioners -Versus1.K.P.Natarajan 2.National Insurance Company No.751, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.

3.A.Dhandapani 4.The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, B.O.Ranipet, No.17-A, Krishnagiri Road, SKS Complex, Ranipet, Vellore 632 401.

..... Respondents Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying for a direction to the learned II Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai, for expeditious disposal of M.C.O.P.No.105 of 2013. For Petitioners : Mr.P.Chandrasekar

ORDER

This civil revision petition seeks for expeditious disposal of the original petition in M.C.O.P.No.105 of 2013 pending on the file of the II Judge, Court of Small Causes, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Chennai.

2. This is an unfortunate case where the petitioners/claimants have been knocking at the doors of the MACT court seeking for compensation for the death of their son in a road accident.

3. The original petition in M.C.O.P. No.105 of 2013 was presented in the year 2013 which was taken on file on 04.01.2013. Despite passage of a decade and more, the claimants are yet to see the end of the litigation. Therefore, feeling aggrieved over this delay, the present civil revision petition has been filed for a direction to the learned II Judge, Court to Small Cause/Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal for expeditious disposal of M.C.O.P.No.105 of 2013.

4. When the matter came up for admission on 06.08.2024, taking into consideration the period that has lapsed from the date of filing of the original petition, I called for a report from the learned II Judge, Court of Small Causes at Chennai, seeking for the reason as to why M.C.O.P.No.105 of 2013 is kept pending for such a long period. The learned II Judge of Court of Small Causes has sent a detailed report. It states that one respondent after the other seems to

have filed petition either to reopen the case or to set aside the ex parte orders passed in the year 2013. The learned Judge would point out that mistake lies on the respondents and hence, the proceedings have been kept pending.

4. Taking into consideration the unfortunate position in which the claimants have been placed, I am inclined to give a direction to the learned II Judge, Court of Small Causes at Chennai, to dispose of M.C.O.P.No.105 of 2013 within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. Absolute discretion is given to the learned Judge to reject the request, if any, made for unnecessary adjournment either at the instance of the claimants or the respondents. The period of a decade and more is sufficient for the disposal of the claim petition. The learned II Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai, is requested to act on the web copy of this order and not to insist on production of a certified copy of the order.

With the above directions, the civil revision petition stands disposed of. No costs.

Index : yes / no : yes / no kmk Note: The Registry is directed to upload this order forthwith. To

1.The II Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai.

V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN.J., kmk