IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2010 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 37124 of 2010(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.P.JOY, S/O.PAPPU, AGED 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT "KACHAPPILLY HOUSE", KANJOOR, KALADY, ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.P.SHINOD SRI.RAM MOHAN.G. SRI.GOVIND P. SRI.P.S.BASTIN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY), OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (RR), ALUVA, ERNAKULAM - 683 101. 2. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (RR), ALUVA, ERNAKULAM - 683 101. 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, BRANCH OFFICE, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683571. 4. JAMES, S/O.ANTONY, AGED 38 YEARS, PUTHENPARAMBIL HOUSE, THATTAMPADY, KANJOOR KARA, KANJOOR VADAKKUMBHAGOM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM - 683 571. 5. INDIRA, W/O.LATE CHELLAPPAN, AGED 49 YEARS, NAMBEARATHUPARAMBU, NAYATHODU KARA, ANGAMALY VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM - 683 573. 6. AJISH.N.C., S/O.LATE CHELLAPPAN, NAMBEARATHUPARAMBU, NAYATHODU KARA, ANGAMALY VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM - 683 573. 7. ANISH.N.C., S/O.LATE CHELLAPPAN, NAMBEARATHUPARAMBU, NAYATHODU KARA, ANGAMALY VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM - 683 573. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN MATHEWS JACOB - SC FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.37124 of 2010-M ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of December, 2010. J U D G M E N T Challenge in this writ petition is against revenue recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 notices. The amount sought to be realised pertains to an award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor as per Ext.P3. Petitioner is the owner of the vehicle which involved in the accident. The Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.1,69,000/- as compensation along with interest due thereon. Since the Tribunal found that the driver in question (4th respondent herein) was not holding a valid license, the 3rd respondent herein, who is the insurer of the vehicle was directed to make payment of the amount of compensation, with liberty reserved to realise such amounts from the petitioner as well as from the 4th respondent. 2. According to the petitioner the 4th respondent was holding a valid license and badge on the relevant date and W.P(C) No.37124 of 2010-M 2 since he was not in station, the same could not be produced before the Tribunal. It is stated that, in fact the certified extract of the particulars of the Driving License was produced along with an affidavit filed by the petitioner. But the Tribunal had omitted to take note of such particulars, is the contention. 3. However, the petitioner had filed Ext.P7 application before the Tribunal seeking correction of the award, on the basis that the findings of that Tribunal with respect to availability of the Driving License is not correct. It is stated that the said application has already been registered before the Tribunal as I.A.No.3531 of 2010. Under such circumstances the petitioner is seeking interference of this Court to restrain the coercive steps of recovery till the disposal of Ext.P7 application by the Tribunal. 4. Heard; Sri.Mathews Jacob, standing counsel appearing on behalf of the 3rd respondent. Considering the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the Tribunal to W.P(C) No.37124 of 2010-M 3 expedite disposal of Ext.P7 application and till then to restrain the recovery steps. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor to consider and dispose of I.A.No.3531 of 2010 in O.P(MV) No.1511 of 2001, after affording reasonable opportunity to both sides, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 6. In order to facilitate the petitioner to pursue remedies under Ext.P7 application, the respondents 1 and 2 are directed to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps of recovery initiated on the basis of Exts.P1 and P2 notices for a period of three months from today. Needless to say that further recovery will be subject to result of the decision taken by the Tribunal. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab