B. S. A. SWAMY, J.

( 1 ) :we are astonished to see the way in which the members of the legal fraternity dealing with the rights of their clients. The appellants are the claimants in OP No. 261 of 1993 on the file of the Motor Vehicles Accident claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, rangareddy District. They filed the said OP no. 261 of 1993 under Section 166 of the motor Vehicles Act and Rule 455 of the andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules claiming a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- towards compensation in view of the death of one peddaboina Venkataiah. Though the counsel for the appellants made the owner of the vehicle as party respondent he did not choose to take the summons to that respondent. In the result, the said OP no. 261 of 1993 was dismissed under Order 9, Rule 2 CPC against the owner of the vehicle. The advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants who is present before this court, submits that he has been practising as an advocate for about two decades and doing motor vehicle cases for more than a decade. In the year 1988 the Supreme court in Oriental Insurance Company limited v. Sunita Rathi, (1998) 1 SSC 365, held that the Insurance Company cannot be fastened with the liability in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document