IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 30784 of 2011(W) -------------------------- OPMV.519/1989 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- SANTHA, AGED 65, S/O. LATE BALAN, BALA NIVAS, AYYANTHOLE VILLAG,E THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, (RR), THRISSUR-20. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, AYYANTHOLE VILLAGE OFFICE, THRISSUR-680001. 4. V. BALAKRISHNAN, S/O. VELA EZHTHASSAN, ERATTU VEEDU, P.O. KANNADI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. PIN-678001. 5. RAMAN, S/O. VELA EZHTHASSAN, ERATTU VEEDU, P.O., KANNADI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678001. GOVT. PLEADER SHIR.S.JALEEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 30784/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OPMV NO. 519/89 DATED 2/1/98 ON THE FILE OF THE MACT, THRISSUR. EXT.P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE RR NOTICE DATED 18/7/09. EXT.P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE FURTHER NOTICE DATED NIL. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS NIL. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 30784 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 18th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the daughter of late Krishnan. The said Krishnan was the 1st respondent in O.P(MV).No.519/1989 on the files of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur. An award was passed in that O.P(MV) directing the said Krishnan to pay compensation to respondents 4 and 5. Subsequently, the said Krishnan died. Now, as the legal heir of late Krishnan, the petitioner is proceeded against for recovery of the award amount. The petitioner's contention is that no property of late Krishnan has devolved by succession on her and, therefore, she cannot be proceeded against for recovery of the amounts due from her deceased father. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following relief; “Issue an appropriate writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents 1 to 3 not to proceed against the personal property of the petitioner for the alleged liability, on the strength of Exts.P1 to P3 in the interest of justice.” 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. In the nature of the order I propose to pass, I do not think it necessary to issue notice to respondents 4 and 5. 3. It it settled law that a legal heir of a defaulter can be proceeded against for recovery of dues only to the extent of property w.p.c.30784/11 - : 2 :- which has devolved by succession on the legal heir. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 1 and 3 to proceed only against the properties of late Krishnan, which devolved by succession on the petitioner. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge