Kerala High Court
Prince Abraham vs The Deputy Tahasildar (R.R.) on 3 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 12TH PHALGUNA, 1942
WP(C).No.5519 OF 2021(L)
PETITIONER/S:
PRINCE ABRAHAM
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O. ABRAHAM, KEEPANASSERIL HOUSE, SENAPATHY P.O,
SANTHANPARA VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK,
IDUKKI DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.JIJI
SRI.PRATHEESH PRABHA
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE DEPUTY TAHASILDAR (R.R.)
UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK OFFICE COMPLEX, NEDUMKANDOM,
IDUKKI - 685553.
2 THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD
THODUPUZHA BRANCH,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685584.
R1 SR.GP K.P HARISH
R2 SC SMT.K.S SANTHI
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.5519 OF 2021(L)
2
JUDGMENT
Petitioner herein is the owner of a vehicle which
was involved in a motor accident, which led to the
institution of OP(MV)No.422 of 2016. Petitioner was
arrayed as the second respondent in the OP(MV)No.422
of 2016. Respondents 1 and 2, the driver and the owner
remained exparte and only the Insurance Company
contested the proceedings. Ultimately the court held
that the petitioner in OP(MV)No.422 of 2016 was entitled
to 3,39,043/- (Rupees three lakhs thirty nine thousand
forty three only) with interest, till realisation and the
third respondent was directed to produce the cheques.
It was further directed that the third respondent will be
entitled to recover the money from the second
respondent. Thereafter, the petitioner herein is stated to
have filed Exts.P3 and P4 as IA.No.1 of 2021 and
IA.No.2 of 2021, to set aside the exparte award and also
to condone the delay that had occurred. In the
WP(C).No.5519 OF 2021(L)
meanwhile, contending that revenue recovery
proceedings are issued against the petitioner, he has
approached this court.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the Insurance Company, who vehemently opposed
the application contending that the attempt of the
petitioner is only to delay the proceedings.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the
petitioner and the learned counsel for the Insurance
Company, I feel that continuous issues need not be gone
into at this stage. However, having evaluated the rival
contentions, I am inclined to grant some relief to the
petitioner, directing the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Thodupuzha to take up Exts.P3 and P4 applications, as
expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of
three months from today. It is made clear that if the
service is not complete, it shall be the responsibility of
the petitioner to ensure that service is completed as
against the respondents in Exts.P3 and P4. The order
shall be passed by the Tribunal on both the applications
WP(C).No.5519 OF 2021(L)
as mentioned above. Coercive steps for recovery of the
money will stand deferred during the above three
months period.
Writ Petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE
R.AV
WP(C).No.5519 OF 2021(L)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD IN OP(M.V)
NO. 422/2016 DATED 11.05.2018.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE AND
ATTACHMENT NOTICE DATED 14.10.2020
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF IA NO.1/2021 DATED
26.02.2021 IN OP(M.V) NO.422/2016 ON
THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THODUPUZHA.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF I.A NO.2/2021 DATED
26.02.2021 IN OP(M.V)NO.422/2016 ON
THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THODUPUZHA.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT
FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN O.P(M.V)
NO.422/2016.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS NIL
