Hon'ble TATIA, J.—At the request of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.

2. The present writ petition is having identical facts as were the facts in S.B.C.W.P. No. 4217/2010 preferred by the same party New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and these two writ petitions have been preferred because of the person that because of one of the accident occurred on 2.8.2008, two separate claim petitions were filed before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.1, Jodhpur by two separate set of claimants.

3. In both the claim cases by identical order, appellant's applications seeking leave to defend the claims were dismissed by the same Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Both the writ petitions were listed together before this bench on 12.5.2010 and it was submitted by learned counsel for the parties that in the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.1, Jodhpur because of the reason that procedure adopted by the Tribunal was questioned by the learned counsel for the parties.

4. S.B.C.W.P. No. 4217/2010 was decided by this Court by detailed judgment dated 7.12.2010 and it has been held that Rule 10.19 permits the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to record the memorandum of substance of evide

Click Here to Read the rest of this document