RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE Vs. PUNDALIK GURUDAS EKAWADE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Mr. Dhargalkar, learned Counsel waives service on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2 (who are the only contesting respondents). Respondent no. 3 is served, but there is no appearance. The notice to respondent no. 4, who was ex-parte before the learned Tribunal, is hereby dispensed with. The petition is taken up for final disposal with consent of the parties.

(2.) By this petition, the petitioner, which is the original respondent no. 3 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, is challenging the order dated 11.08.2015, by which application filed by the petitioner for taking the written statement on record has been rejected.

(3.) The brief facts are that the respondent nos. 1 and 2, who are the original claimants have filed Claim Petition No. 15/2013, which is pending before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panaji, Goa. The respondent nos. 1 and 2 are seeking compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for the death of one Gurudas Ekawade in a vehicular accident. It appears that an ex-parte order was passed against the present petitioner on 25.06.2013. However, on an application filed by the petitioner and a no objection given by the respondent nos. 1 and 2, the said order was set aside on 09.12.2014. Thereafter, the petition was posted before the Lok Adalat on various dates with a view to explore possibility of settlement, which eventually did not materialise. On 05.03.2015, application (Exhibit D-20) was filed by the petitioner for taking the written statement on record. It appears that the said application remained pending. On 13.06.2015 as there was no possibility of settlement, the petition was fixed for evidence in which on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2, three witnesses were examined. On 11.08.2015, the learned Tribunal passed an order thereby rejecting the prayer of the petitioner for permitting it to place written statement on record. The learned Presiding Officer has found that the petitioner had failed to file written statement on 06.01.2015 or on 03.02.2015 and the petitioner has been negligent in pursuing the matter. The learned Presiding Officer was of the view that no leniency could be shown to the petitioner.