Professional Documents
Culture Documents
OF 2006
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & Anr.
Respondents
N.D.O.H.: 07.01.2016
AWARD NO. 01/DCW/2004-05
WRITTEN STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE
RESPONDENT NO.2 / DMRC
PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS:
That there is no cause of action in the present Suit under reply
against answering defendant, hence; need to be rejected under
Order VII Rule 11 of C.P.C.
That the suit of plaintiff is not maintainable because the suit is
time barred and beyond limitation period .
1. That it is respectfully submitted that the present suit has been
filed without the compliance of the mandatory provisions of the
section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure which is mandatory and
without which the suit is liable to be dismissed with costs. That it
is respectfully submitted that Section 80(1) of the Code requires
prior notice of two months to be served on the Government as a
condition for filing a suit except when there is urgency for interim
order in which case the court may not insist on the rigid rule of
prior notice. The two months' period has been provided for so that
the Government shall examine the claim put up in the notice and
has sufficient time to send a suitable reply. The underlying object
is to curtail litigation. The object is also to curtail the area of
dispute and controversy. Similar provisions also exist in various
other legislations as well. Wherever the statutory provision requires
service of notice as a condition precedent for filing of suit and
prescribed period therefore, it is not only necessary for the
Governments or departments or other statutory bodies to send a
reply to such a notice but it is further necessary to properly deal
with all material points and issues raised in the notice. Thus in the
instant case no notice was ever served or any averment has been
made to that effect of the compliance of the provisions of the
section 80 CPC which is mandatory. Thus, the result is that the
object underlying Section 80 of the Code and similar provisions got
defeated and has led to this avoidable litigation resulting in heavy
expenses and costs to the exchequer as well. Had the plaintiffs
would served the notice and a proper reply by defendant no1 could
have resolved the instant issue after knowing the stand of the
defendant no.1
That the claim petition under reply is not maintainable and liable
to be dismissed on this count alone as the petitioner has failed to
REPLY ON MERIT
That the contents of paragraphs 1 to 2 are matter of record and
hence
to strict
thereof
That the contents of Para 3 & 4 are denied. The contents of para
3
&
DMRC is not joint venture with Era Infra Engineering Ltd instead
Defendant -2 / Mertostroy-Era is a contractor of Defendant No-1
/DMRC
That the contents of paragraphs 5 to 6 are wrong and false hence
denied . It is respectfully submitted that if the deceased was going
toward Sant Paramand Hospital , as per traffic rule he should be
on
the left side of the road (One way terrific from Kashmiri gate
toward
show that
hand and
undue
record not denied and the petitioner may kindly be put to strict proof
thereof .
i.e.
Mertostroy-Era
JV.
That
Delhi
Metro
Rail
the
petitioner
as
Mertostroy-Era
JV
i.e.
contractor
is
18
Prayer
clause
of
the
reference
petition
as
the
submits
light
that
of
aforesaid
the
contents
observation
of
the
it
is
present
PRAYER:
It is stated that in view of the abovementioned
Preliminary Objections and the Parawise Reply on
Merits submitted by the Respondent , this Honble
Court be graciously pleased to dismiss the said
reference petition with exemplary costs.
RESPONDENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified at New Delhi on this
records.
Nothing
THROUGH
Respondent
[A.S.RAO]
ASSISTANT LAW
OFFICER
DELHI METRO RAIL CORPERATION
LTD ,NEW DELHI
7 Jan 2016
LAC NO.
OF 2006
Petitioners
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & Anr.
Respondents
INDEX
S.
NO.
1
PARTICULARS
WRITTEN STATEMENTON THE BEHALF OF
RESPONDENT NO.2/DMRC
PAGE
NO.
16
FILED BY:
[A.S.RAO ]
Jan 07,
2016
LAC NO.
OF 2006
Petitioners
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & Anr.
Respondents
AFFIDAVIT
and
the
circumstances
of
the
case
and
VERIFICATION:
I, A.S.Rao , the Deponent above named do hereby verify
on solemn affirmation on .day of January , 2016 at
Delhi that the contents of Para 1 to of my foregoing
affidavit are true to my knowledge and based on the
official records, no part of it false and nothing material
has been concealed there from.
DEPONENT
10
11