/Father Of The Petitioner vs The Divisional Manager
2021 Latest Caselaw 9949 Ker

O.P.(MAC) No.32/2021              1

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

    WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 3RD CHAITHRA, 1943

                       OP (MAC).No.32 OF 2021

    AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OPMV 1225/2016 OF ADDITIONAL
      DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - III, PATHANAMTHITTA


PETITIONER:/FATHER OF THE PETITIONER

               GOPINATH PILLAI
               AGED 87 YEARS
               S/O KRISHNAKURUP,
               SREESADANAM, VALLIKODE P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA.

               BY ADV. SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH

RESPONDENT/3RD RESPONDENT AND WIFE OF THE PETITIONER:

       1       THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY
               LTD.
               T.P.HUB, KHAISE BUILDING, BEACH ROAD, OPP.BENZIGAR
               HOSPITAL, KOLLAM-691001.

       2       DEEPA CHANDRAN.
               W/O LATE SREEKUMAR, LAKSHMI GAYATHRI, KALANJOOR
               P.O,
               KALANJOOR VILLAGE,
               KONNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689694.

               R1 BY ADV. SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH

     THIS OP (MAC) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.03.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 O.P.(MAC) No.32/2021                   2




                                JUDGMENT

Dated this the 24th day of March 2021

The petitioner herein is the father of the applicant in O.P.(MV)

No.1225/2016, in which the applicant claimed compensation for serious

injuries sustained to him in a road transport accident. The petitioner herein

represented the son, who was bed ridden, as the guardian and next

friend, since the son was not capable of contesting the matter. An award

was passed and direction was issued to deposit the money in the court for

being transferred to the petitioner's account. The son died after the award.

Ext.P2 application was filed by the daughter-in-law of the petitioner for a

direction that amount ordered to be deposited shall not be transferred to

the account of the petitioner. Ext.P3 is the objection filed by the petitioner

to that application. Petitioner has approached this Court for a direction to

the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to consider Ext.P3 objection.

2. The respondent-Insurance Company appeared through Adv. Lal

K.Jose. Heard both sides.

3. It seems that Ext.P2 application is yet to be heard by the Tribunal.

Ext.P3 objection filed by the petitioner herein seems to be on record. It is

not clear as to what prompted the petitioner to presume that the Tribunal

shall not consider his objection. It is too early at this stage to hold that the

Tribunal will not consider the petitioner's objection or will pass order

ignoring Ext.P3 objection filed by the petitioner which is on record. In the

absence of any material on record to indicate that the Tribunal is not

inclined to consider Ext.P3 objection, I feel that the writ petition is

premature and is based on assumptions. I am not inclined to pass any

specific direction since it is the duty of the court to consider the rival

contentions and to pass appropriate orders.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS

JUDGE

dpk

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE AWARD IN OP(MV) NO.1225/2016 DATED 3/1/2020 OF THE ADDL.

DISTRICT JUDGE AND MACT-III, PATHANAMTHITTA.

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE I.A.NO.1/2021 DATED 11/2/2021 BEFORE THE ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE AND MACT-III, PATHANAMTHITTA.

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 12/3/2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.