S.K. MISHRA, J. 1.

The present writ petition has been preferred by the Petitioners, who are the legal heirs of late Maturam Tudu, who died in a road accident, for transfer of MAC Case No.363 of 2018 from MACT, Balasore to MACT, Baripada for analogous hearing with MAC Case No.29 of 2018.

2. The brief background fact, which led to filing of this writ petition is that late Maturam Tudu died on 03.02.2018 (wrongly typed as 03.02.2016) in a motor vehicular accident involving OR-11-K-9004 (Hiwa). During 2018 the Petitioners, who are the wife and minor children of late Maturam Tudu, filed an application under section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, shortly, “the Act, 1988”, before the MACT, Baripada, claiming compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- (Ten Lakh) from the Owner as well as Insurer of the offending vehicle with a joint and several liability, which was registered as MAC Case No.29 of 2018. 3. After filing of the said claim application, it came to the notice of the present Petitioner No.1 that two sisters of late Maturam Tudu, during September, 2018, filed MAC Case No.363 of 2018 before the MACT, Balasore purporting to have included the Petitioners, claiming compensation of Rs. 12,00,000/- <br/>

(Twelve Lakh). Knowing so, an application dated 03.02.2022 under Order 1, Rule 10 (11) of CPC was moved by the present Petitioners, who were arrayed as Petitioner Nos.1 to 3 in MAC Case No.363 of 2018, to delete their names from the cause title.

4. On filing of such application, the Petitioner Nos.4 &amp; 5, in MAC Case No.363 of 2018, who are the sisters of deceased Maturam Tudu, did not oppose to the said prayer made by the present Petitioners. Ultimately, the Court of MACT-I-cum-Dist. Judge, Balasore, vide order dated 10.02.2022 ordered to delete the names of the present Petitioners from the cause title of the said case. 5. The case of the Petitioners is that the accident occurred at Rairangpur within Baripada Judgship and the claim application was filed by them prior to filing of MAC Case No.363 of 2018 at Balasore, they being the successors-in-interest of the deceased. It has further been stated that in view of the order of the MACT, Balasore passed in MAC Case No.363 of 2018 dated

10.02.2022, the proceeding before Baripada MACT is to be continued and the proceeding before the Balasore MACT should be transferred to Baripada for analogous hearing. 6. It is further stated in the writ petition that the Opposite Party Nos.4 &amp; 5, who are also the claimants in MAC Case No.363 of 2018, who are alleged unmarried sisters of the deceased Maturam Tudu, have no right of succession and they hail from their native village and the Balasore address given by them is technically added to create jurisdiction at Balasore. 7. It has also been stated in the writ petition that as there is no other alternative and efficacious remedy, the Petitioners are being compelled to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court and pray for transfer of MAC Case No.363 of 2018 from Balasore to Baripada for analogous hearing with MAC Case No. 29 of 2018. 8. Though the notice was duly served on Opposite Party No.4 on 02.03.2024, she chose not to appear in this case and oppose the prayer made in the writ petition. 9. Similarly, notice issued to the Opposite Party No.3 returned unserved with a postal endorsement “Addressee out of station hence returned to sender”. Hence, as per the judgment of the apex Court, reported in AIR 1989 SC 630 (M/s. Madan and Co. Vs. Wazir Jaivir Chand), vide order dated 04.04.2024, the notice on the said Opposite Party was held to be sufficient. 10. The Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2 being the Owner and Insurer of the offending vehicle respectively, who are also parties to both the said cases i.e. MAC Case No.363 of 2018 and MAC Case No.29 of 2018, on being noticed, though have rendered appearance, have no objection