IN THE COURT OF THE LD.FAST TRACK 7TH
ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE COURT AT ALIPORE
MACC CASE No. 33 of 2013
Ansura Mallick @ Ansura Bibi
…………….Applicant
-Vs-
1. Bhim Chandra Naskar
……………..Opp.Party No.1
2.National Insurance Co.Ltd.
………………Opp.Party No.2
The Opposite
Party No.2 National Insurance Co.Ltd. files their Written Statement in the
above case with the statements as to following :-
1. That there is no cause of action as
against this Opposite Party and this Ld.Tribunal lacks jurisdiction in
entertaining the present claim application.
2. That the claim is barred by the
principal of estoppels, waiver, and acquiescence.
3. That the claim is barred by
limitation.
4. That the claim is bad for misjoinder
of unnecessary parties and non-joinder of necessary parties inasmuch as the
name of the insurer of other vehicle and details insurance policy thereof have
not been disclosed in the claim application.
5. That so far this instant is
concerned, this Ld.Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to try and decide the case
continuance of the case in this ld. Tribunal would lead it to the failure of justice
in this case.
6. That the claimant is bound to prove
the statement made in the claim application independent of any defect and/or
deficit on the part of the Ops.
7. That the claimant must prove the case
supported by lawful papers and documents that are legally admissible.
8. That the claim petition has not been
supported by any documents required under rule 329 of the W.B.M.V.Rules, 1989.
9. That the statements made in
paragraphs no.1,2,3,4,5 & 6 of the application all are denied by this
opposite party no.2 and the applicant shall produce voter identity card,
certificate and other documents in connection with age, income etc. of the
victim and the applicant is put to strict legal proof thereof.
10.
That
the allegations made in Paragraph 8, 9, 10, 11,12,13,14 and 23 of the claims
petition is not admitted by the answering Opp.Party. All such allegations are
baseless, misleading and are not specific. This opposite party no.2 denies and
dispute that due to rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the
said offending
Vehicle no.WB-20X-1874(M/C)
occurred an accident on 16.12.2012 at about 7.35 hours and also denied that due
to the said accident as alleged the victim injured. This opposite party also
submit before your Honours court that the victim Ansura Mllick @ Ansura Bibi
was walking on the middle of the road and for that reason the aforesaid incident was
done so the victim is sole responsible for this accident.
11.
That
this Opp.Party at present unable to admit whether the interest of Bhim Chandra Naskar, Purbapra, Rghudebpur,
Bishnupur, Pin- 700104 in the use of vehicle No. WB-20X-1874(M/C) was insured with this Opp.Party at the material
time unless further and better particulars regarding the insurance are
disclosed by the claimant, failing which it shall be presumed that this
Opp.Party is not the insurer in the instant case and the name of this Opp.Party
shall be expunged from the case with compensatory.
12.
That
this opposite party no.2 submits that if, there is found any discrepancy of the
driving license and necessary particulars of the involved vehicle at the
material time of accident as alleged due to such reason with no such as stand
in law this opposite party no.2 has no liability to pay any compensation to the
claimant.
13.
That
with reference to the statements made in paragraph nos.19, 20 and 21 of the
said application are all denied by this opp.party no.2 and the applicant is put
to strict proof of the same.
14.
That
the statements made in the claim application in paragraph no.22 of the said
application the amount of compensation as prayed for of the said application is
baseless, imaginary and unjustified and excessive and this opposite party no.2
is not liable to pay Rs.3,00,000/- or any portion or cost and interest of it.
15.
This opposite party no.2 seeks protection
under section 142,147 and 149 of the M.V.Act.
16.
Notwithstanding
the right to avoid the liability as stated in the proceeding paragraphs this
opposite party no.2 is entitled to contest the case on all or any of the
grounds that are available to the owner of the vehicle under any of terms of
specified under section 170 of the M.V.Act, 1988 and also under the terms and
conditions of the policy of Insurance.
17.
That
this Opposite Part no. 2 craves leave to file an additional and/or amended
written statement, if necessary.
18.
This
opposite party no.2 submits that this opposite party has been wrongly imp
leaded in this case and its name liable to be expunged.
Hence, it is prayed that for the interest
of justice
And
equity your Honour would be dismiss the claim
Petition in favour of the answering Opposite Party
No.2
i.e. National Insurance Co. Ltd.
VERIFICATION
I…………………………………………………………………
authorized signatory of National Insurance Co. Ltd., do hereby declare that the
statements made in the foregoing Written Statements are true to my information
derived from the records of the case available at my office and I verify
believe them to be correct.
I, sign this verification
at my office on this…………..day of ………………201
Prepared in my chamber
Snehasish Sutradhar
Advocate
A
F F I
D A V
I T
I, authorized
signatory of National Insurance Co. Ltd.of aged
about years by faith Hindu, by occupation- Admn.officer, office address is National Insurance Co.
Ltd.,Legal Hub,8,India Exchange Place, 7th Floor, Kolkata- 700001,
do hereby solemnly
affirm and declare
as follows :-
1.
That
I am the
opposite party no.2 of this
case and am
well conversant with
the facts and
circumstances of this
case.
This is true to my knowledge.
2.
That
the statements made
in the paragraph
numbers 1 to 19 of
the present petition
are true to
my knowledge and
belief and the
rests are my
humble submission before
your Honour’s Court.
-------------------
Draft Prepared in my chamber Deponent
Identified by me
Snehasish Sutradhar
Advocate
Advocate
Peyarabagan,laskarpur
Kolkata-700153
No comments:
Post a Comment