IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2008 / 31ST ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3557 of 2008(W) ------------------------- OPMV.1816/1999 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ALAPPUZHA .................... PETITIONER: ------------ A.LAWRANCE, NELLIVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, KARAKONAM, KUNNATHUKAL, NEYYATTINKARA. BY ADV. SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. NARAYANAN CHETTIYAR, S/O KRISHNAN CHETTIAR, KOCHUPARAMBU, WARD NO.VI, AMBALAPUZHA PANCHAYAT. 2. V.VIJAYAN, S/O R.VARGHESE, PADIYANVILAI, EAST OF VIMALAPURAM, PRIMARY SCHOOL, UNNAMALAKKAD PANCHAYAT, THATTARAM VILLAGE, VINCODE P.O., KANYAKUMARI DIST. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., MARTHANDAM BRANCH, KANYAKUMARI DIST. BY ADV. SRI.JOHN JOSEPH VETTIKAD FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.3557/2008 -------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P3 award rendered by the MACT, Alappuzha in O.P(MV).No.1816/1999. According to him, despite the fact that, he was not served with notice from the Tribunal, he was declared ex-parte and exonerating the Insurance Company, compensation was ordered to be paid by him. It is stated that, he came to know of the award only when revenue recovery steps were initiated against him in November, 2007. According to the counsel, there upon, the petitioner filed Exts.P5 and P6 applications for condonation of delay and to get the ex-parte award set aside along with Ext.P9 to stay the operation of the award. The complaint is that while orders are not passed, on these applications revenue recovery action is 2 continued. 2. Although notice has been issued in this writ petition, it has been served only on respondents 2 and 3 and in so far as the Ist respondent is concerned, notice is returned with the endorsement 'not known'. In the nature of the order that I propose to pass, I do not think it necessary to keep this writ petition pending any more. Taking note of the facts as stated above, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the Tribunal shall consider and pass orders on Exts.P5 and P6 along with Ext.P9 stay petition filed by the petitioner seeking stay. This the Tribunal shall do as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 8 weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE vi. 3