IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2010 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 13127 of 2010(M) -------------------------- OPMV.1513/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ K.D.BIJU, S/O.DIVAKARAN, KONGINIPARAMBIL HOUSE, AKKALAM BHAGAM, CHANNANICKADU P.O., PANACHIKADU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.KURUVILLA JACOB RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. K.S.PRASAD, S/O.SIVADASAN, KAKKATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE,READYMADE JUNCTION BHAGAM, KURICHY POST, PANACHIKADU VILLAGE. 2. SHYLESH (DIED), S/O.BHADRAN, VADAKKEDATHU HOUSE, KURISUMMOODU BHAGAM, PERUMBETTY POST, CHANGANACHERRY. 3. P.D.VISWA RAO, AYATHIL PUTHENVEEDU, MAZHUVELIL HOUSE, ELAVUMTHITTA P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA. 4. THE ORIENITAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, BRANCH OFFICE, KANJIKUSHY, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, KOTTAYAM. 5. JYOTHI SHYLESH, W/O.LATE SHYLESH, VADAKKEDATHU HOUSE, KURISHUMMOODU BHAGOM, PERUMBETTY POST, CHANGANCHERRY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ----------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.13127 OF 2010 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of May, 2010 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ The petitioner has filed this Writ petition challenging the execution proceedings initiated by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam ('MACT', for short) against him for implementing Ext.P2 award. The petitioner was involved in a motor accident involving a motor car that was driven by the 3rd respondent, which collided with a motor cycle driven by the 1st respondent. The car also hit the jeep that was driven by the petitioner. The 1st respondent filed Ext.P1 claim petition for the grant of compensation for injuries sustained in the accident. Though the petitioner had received notice in the claim petition, he approached the registered owner of the jeep, one Sri.T.K.Sabu, and informed of the same. He assured the petitioner that he would contest the case. 2. Later the petitioner got a job in Bombay and he left the place. According to the petitioner, he came to know of Ext.P2 award only when a copy of Ext.P3(A) execution petition was served on him. The petitioner immediately took steps to W.P.(C) No.13127/2010 2 set aside the award by filing Ext.P4 application. Ext.P4 was accompanied by a petition, Ext.P5, to condone the delay in filing the same. The complaint of the petitioner is that the MACT is proceeding with the execution, without passing any orders on Exts.P4 and P5. He, therefore, seeks appropriate directions for an expeditious disposal of the said petitions. 3. In the nature of the limited relief that is sought for, I do not think it necessary to issue notice to the respondents. It is sufficient that this Writ petition is disposed of directing the MACT to consider and pass orders on Exts.P4 and P5 on an early date. 4. In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the MACT, Kottayam to consider and pass final orders on the applications filed by the petitioner, I.A.Nos.711/2010 and 712/2010 in O.P.M.V.No.1513/2010, evidenced herein by Exts.P4 and P5, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Pending final orders on the W.P.(C) No.13127/2010 3 petitions referred to above, all further proceedings to execute the award of the MACT, Kottayam against the petitioner based on Ext.P3(A) petition shall be kept in abeyance. (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) ps