A single judge summarily dismissed an insurance company's first appeal challenging an order directing no-fault liability payment, holding that new defences raised in appeal without prior pleading in the reply are not maintainable.
The first appeal was dismissed summarily with no substantive relief granted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
abs
1 FA 4466/09
FARAD CONTINUATION
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO. 4466 OF 2009
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders
Court's or Judge's Orders
Mr. S.G. Deshpande for the appellant.
Mr. Nitish Bhutekar for respondent no.1.
CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J.
DATE : 17TH JANUARY 2011
P.C. :
2 FA 4466/09
the offending vehicle did not stand in the name of respondent no.4 (owner) and, therefore, the insurance company was not liable. None of these two defences were raised in the reply to the respondent’s application for no fault liability. In the absence of any specific pleading in the reply, the contentions cannot be allowed to be raised for the first time in the appeal. No other point was urged. Consequently, the first appeal is dismissed summarily.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether new defences regarding lack of insurance and vehicle registration can be raised for the first time in appeal due to absence of pleading in reply.
Whether the appellant insurance company is jointly and severally liable for no fault liability.
Unknown Insurance Company
Unnamed Respondents 1 to 3
Unnamed Owner (Respondent 4)
D.G. KARNIK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
