Kerala High Court
Usha vs The District Collector, ... on 15 September, 2022
WA NO. 1368 OF 2022 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 24TH BHADRA, 1944
WA NO. 1368 OF 2022
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 17236/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
USHA,
AGED 53 YEARS
W/O UNNI, RESIDING AT ANAMOOTIL HOUSE, EDACOCHIN,
COCHIN, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 682 010.
BY ADV P.T.SHEEJISH
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM,
FIRST FLOOR OF CIVIL STATION, COLLECTORATE, ECHAMUKU,
KUNNUMPURAM, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN- 682030.
2 DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), KOCHI TALUK,
GROUND FLOOR, KB JACOB ROAD, FORT KOCHI, KOCHI,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682 001.
3 THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
REGIONAL OFFICE, METRO PALACE, OPP. NORTH RAILWAY
STATION, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN.- 682011, REPRESENTED BY
REGIONAL MANAGER
SRI. K P HARISH, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.09.2022, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO. 1368 OF 2022 2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 15th day of September, 2022
SHAJI P.CHALY,J
Petitioner in W.P.© No.17236/2022 has filed this appeal challenging the
judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court dated the 8 th day of July, 2022,
whereby the following reliefs sought for by the petitioner was declined:
(a) To issue a writ of mandamus or order or direction to the respondent
to keep the coercive proceedings pursuant to Exhibit P2, against the
petitioner in abeyance and permit the petitioner to pay the overdue
amount in 30 monthly installments without hampering the family life of
the petitioner.
(b) Grant such other reliefs which are appropriate and incidental to this
proceedings and which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper.
2.The subject issue relates to an award passed by the Motor Accidents
Claims Tribunal in OP(MV) No.2039/2016 dated the 25 th day of May, 2020. The
Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.11,82,800/- to the claimant therein,
however, by granting liberty to the Insurance Company to realise the amount
from the appellant since there was violation of policy conditions. Consequently,
the amount was deposited before the Tribunal, and the company initiated
revenue recovery action, which was under challenge in the writ petition. The
learned SingleJudge, after taking note of the factual and legal circumstances held
that the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cannot be interdicted in the
manner and mode as sought to be done in the writ petition.
3. The paramount contention advanced by the appellant is that the appellant
has sought only for payment of the amount due in reasonable installments. In our
considered opinion, when the liability of the appellant is admitted and when
recovery action was initiated by the insurance company resorting to the Kerala
Revenue Recovery Act, 1968, it is for the appellant to approach the statutory
authority in accordance with law. In fact there was no arbitrariness or legal
infirmities on the part of the insurance company or the authorities under the
Kerala Revenue Recovery Act in initiating the recovery action. Therefore, we are
of the clear opinion that the learned Single Judge was right in dismissing the writ
petition.
4. Therefore, after having heard learned counsel for the appellant
Sri.P.T.Sreejish, learned Senior Government Pleader Sri.K.P.Harish and perusing
the pleadings and documents on records, we do not find any jurisdictional error
or other legal infirmities justifying our interference in an intra court appeal filed by
the writ petitioner.
Needless to say, the writ appeal fails, accordingly, it is dismissed.
Sd/-
S.MANIKUMAR
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
SHAJI P.CHALY
smv JUDGE
