IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 7TH JANUARY 2011 / 17TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 36614 of 2010(B) ----------------------- PETITIONER : -------------------- SAJAN MATHEW, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.LATE MATHEW, RESIDING AT KAKKANATTU HOUSE, THADIYAMPADU P.O., KATTAPPANA (VIA), IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JOICE GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), THODUPUZHA, TALUK OFFICE, MINI CIVIL STATION, THODUPUZHA, PIN-688 554. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VILLAGE OFFICE, PAINAVU P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-688 455. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, KOTTAYAM, PIN-686 001. 4. MUHAMMED SALI, FORMERLY RESIDING AT PUTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, 34TH MILE (VARIKKAYANI KARA), MUNDAKAYAM, AT PRESENT RESIDING AT PUTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, ARPOOKARA, KOTTAYAM, KANJIRAPPALLY (VIA), KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 503. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN R3 BY ADV. SMT.A.SREEKALA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.36614 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Petitioner is the 1st respondent before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam in O.P.No.1418/02, in which that Tribunal had passed Ext.P2 Award. By virtue of the Award the 3rd respondent herein was directed to make payment of the amount of compensation due to the claimant, with liberty reserved to recover such amount jointly and severally from the petitioner and the 4th respondent herein. Consequent to payment of compensation, the 3rd respondent had approached the Tribunal for getting the amount recovered, and on that basis Revenue Recovery Certificate was issued by the M.A.C.T. Steps was initiated for recovery of the amounts, on issuing Ext.P3 notice against the petitioner. 2. According to the petitioner, the vehicle which was involved in the accident stood transferred to another person and the ownership was also got transferred. However, it is stated that, the petitioner was declared ex-parte before the Tribunal and he could not bring these facts to the notice of the Tribunal. Challenging Ext.P1 Award, the petitioner had W.P.(C).36614/10 -2- already filed M.A.C.A.No.1627/10 before the appellate court (this court). Since there is delay in filing the appeal, the petitioner could not seek any interim relief in the appeal, is the submission. 3. But, grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents 1 and 2 are taking coercive steps for recovery, on the basis of Ext.P3 notice. Hence the petitioner seeks interference of this court to restrain recovery steps till he could able to move the appeal for getting appropriate interim reliefs. 4. Heard; counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent. Considering the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondents 1 and 2 to keep in abeyance coercive steps of recovery for a reasonable time, in order to facilitate the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy from the appellate court. 5. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents 1 and 2 to keep all coercive steps of recovery initiated on the basis of Ext.P3 notice for a period of two months from today, in order to facilitate the petitioner to seek appropriate interim relief from the Appellate court. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb