IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2011 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 RP.No. 807 of 2011() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN MACA.1154/2005 Dated 11/04/2011 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): APPELLANTS -------------------------------- BIMAL RAJ, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O. DAMODARAN, THELAKKAT HOUSE, 4/261, KUNNAKKAVU MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.K.GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. NIZAR.N.M., S/O. MAMU NEDUMPALLIILCHELIL CHALIKKAVATTOM.P.O., KOCHI-28. 2. K.H.NAZAR, PULLUPARAMBIL HOUSE, ZEENATH MANZIL, CHAKKAPARAMBU,THAMMANAM.P.O. 3. NAZEER, ANEDUMPILLY VEEDU, CHALIKKAVATTOM, EDAPPALLY SOUTH, PIN-682021. 4. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PATTAMANA BUILDINGS, ALUVA. 5. M.P. GOPINATHAN, 27/2129, ASWATHI, SAMRATTO ROAD, KADAVANTHARA, ERNAKULAM. 6. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., DIRECT AGENT BRANCH, III FLOOR, CHANDRIKA BUILDING M.G. ROAD, ERNAKULAM. By Advocate Sri. Lal George for R4 Adv. Sri. Jacob Mathew for R6 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. .................................................................. R.P. No.807 of 2011 in M.A.C.A. 1154 of 2005 ...................................................................... Dated: 21-12-2011 ORDER Ramkumar, J. Heard both sides. Since the petitioner was only challenging the finding regarding the negligence and there was no liability under the impugned award on the petitioner to pay any amount, the first proviso to Sec. 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act was not attracted. Hence, the rejection of the appeal for the reason that the statutory deposit mandated by the above provision was not made, is not correct Hence, the Review Petition is allowed and the above appeal is restored to file. V. Ramkumar, Judge. P.Q. Barkath Ali, Judge. ani/