IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 9TH JULY 2010 / 18TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 21308 of 2010(K) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SYAMALA, D/O.SANTHA, AGED 42 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHAKKIAMMATHARA HOUSE, PATTANAKKAD P.O., CHERTHALA-688 531. BY ADV. SRI.T.B.SARASAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRIVANDRUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, PIN-695 001. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/07/2010, ALONG WITH WPC. NO.21329 OF 2010 AND CONNECTED CASES THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J ---------------------------------------- W.P(C) Nos.21308/2010, 21309/2010, 21330/2010 21331/2010, 21332/2010 & 21333/2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 9th day of July, 2010. J U D G M E N T The issue involved in all these cases is rather similar and hence is being dealt with together. 2. The petitioners are either injured or the legal heirs of the deceased, who sustained serious injuries in some road traffic accidents, which led to different claim petitions before the concerned Tribunals. On conclusion of the trial, the Tribunals have passed Awards granting compensation with interest as specified. Inspite of filing Execution Petitions and resorting to such other steps, the liability remains still to be satisfied, which made the petitioners to approach this Court by filing these Writ Petitions. 3. The learned standing counsel appearing for the Corporation submits that, the default is never wilful; but because of some unforeseen pecuniary circumstances and that the entire liability will be cleared within 'three' months. Taking note of the said submission, this Court does not find it necessary to adjudicate the matter further and accordingly, all these matters are closed W.P(C) Nos.21308/2010, 21309/2010, 21330/2010 21331/2010, 21332/2010 & 21333/2010 2 directing the respondents to effect the payments as assured and undertaken before this Court, satisfying the liability within three months as above. 4. However, before parting with the matters, this Court would like to express serious concern with regard to the plight of the persons like the petitioners herein. It is revealed that, eventhough the compensation was awarded by the Tribunals years back, the Corporation has not disbursed the amounts so far; nor have they filed any appeal in this regard. The stand being reflected is that, the Corporation chooses to honour the Awards only after filing Writ Petitions and in some cases, after filing Contempt of Court Case. This practice cannot but be deprecated in the strongest possible words; for the plain reason that it only helps to increase the number of litigations before this Court, besides causing much loss and hardships to the claimants. Being a State Government undertaking, the respondent Corporation has also got a duty to ensure that the litigations before this Court are caused to be scaled down to the maximum possible extent, unless there is any valid defence. In view of the undisputed fact that the Awards passed by W.P(C) Nos.21308/2010, 21309/2010, 21330/2010 21331/2010, 21332/2010 & 21333/2010 3 the various Tribunals have not been chosen to be challenged by filing appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the non- payment of the due amount in similar cases atleast in a phased manner, is not liable to be justified; which requires to be considered, for providing appropriate remedial measures; lest the default in this regard should invite adverse consequences including ordering 'Cost'. More so, since the time factor very much pricks the conscience, as in W.P(C) No.21308 of 2010, where the accident giving rise to the cause of action was on 26.2.1994 and the Award was passed by the Tribunal on 20.12.1999. It has also to be considered why the vehicles are not duly insured, to meet the requirement under Chapter X and Chapter XI of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 and whether the KSRTC enjoys/continue any benefit of exemption under Section 146(3) (C) of the Motor Vehicles Act. 6. However, for the time being, this Court takes a lenient view and refrains from awarding any cost in respect of the delay and the expenses stated as incurred by the petitioners in filing Execution Petitions and the Writ Petitions. 7. Registry shall forward a copy of this judgment to W.P(C) Nos.21308/2010, 21309/2010, 21330/2010 21331/2010, 21332/2010 & 21333/2010 4 Principal Secretary to the Government of Kerala, Department of Transports, for appropriate steps, if any. The Writ Petitions are disposed of. Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge ab