THE AUTHORISED OFFICER Vs. SAPANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner - Royal Sundaram General Insurance Company Limited represents itse authorized officer before this Court being aggrieved by the order dtd. 11/11/2025 passed by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi, which has rejected the application under I.A.No.I filed by the petitioner under Sec. 151 of CPC seeking permission to file the written statement.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner taking this Court through the records submits that the claim petition under Sec. 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1989 has been filed by the respondents herein seeking compensation on account of death of one Baragali arising a road traffic accident involving a tipper lorry bearing Reg.No.KA-28-B5969 in the road traffic accident. That on 16/10/2024 notice of the said petition was served on the petitioner herein who was arrayed as respondent in the said claim petition. Petitioner herein appeared before the Tribunal on 22/2/2025. That on 22/3/2025 the Tribunal has taken as written statement not filed. She further submits that an application in I.A.No.I under Sec. 151 of CPC was filed on 7/11/2025 seeking permission to file the written statement. She submits that the delay in filing written statement was on account of the fact that the petitioner - insurance company was causing an internal enquiry regarding the claim being made by the respondents and it is only thereafter that the petitioner could have filed the detailed written statement. Hence, there was a delay. That the Tribunal taking serious exception to that has rejected the application.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the respondents - claimants on the other hand submits that the delay in filing the written statement has not been satisfactorily explained. However, he submits that if a direction is issued to the Tribunal to take the written statement and to dispose the matter on merits in a time bound manner, the purpose would be served.