IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DECEMBER 2010 / 1ST POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 32353 of 2008(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JAIN JOHNSON, VANIYAPPURAKUNNEL HOUSE, NATTAKOM P.O. KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE MANAGING DIRECTOR/GENERAL MANAGER, TAMIL NADU STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION (MADURAI) LTD, BYE-PASS ROAD, DINDIGUL-624004, TAMIL NADU. ADV. SRI.SUBASH CYRIAC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX EXT.P1-TRUE COPY OF GIST OF AWARD IN OP(MV) 1915/2001 DT.16.5.2006 // TRUE COPY // P.S. TO JUDGE T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 32353 of 2008-B - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 22nd day of December, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner herein is the widow of late Shri Johnson who died in a motor vehicle accident. The vehicle involved is a bus bearing registration No.TN-57/483 which was travelling from Kumaly to Cumbum. The petitioner along with other dependents of the deceased, had filed OP(MV) No.1915/2001 claiming compensation against the respondent and other parties. The same was filed before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam and by Ext.P1, an award was passed directing the respondent herein to deposit an amount of Rs.9,94,500/- with interest at 6% per annum thereon from the date of petition till date of realisation and cost of Rs.10,000/- within 30 days from the date of award. 2. Since the respondent did not deposit the amount, the petitioner and other claimants filed E.P. No.522/2005 before the Tribunal. Even though the Tribunal ordered attachment of the bus, still the respondent did not deposit the amount. It is in these circumstances, this writ petition has been filed seeking for appropriate directions in the matter. 3. This Court passed an interim order on 15.12.2008 as follows: wpc 32353/2008 2 “In spite of having sought for adjournment on more than one occasion, there is no appearance on behalf of the respondent when the case was called in the morning and when it is taken up in the afternoon. In the circumstances, there will be an interim direction as prayed for. The respondent is directed to deposit the entire amount awarded before the MACT, Kottayam within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the respondent has any objection, they shall file a counter affidavit and seek variation of this order.” The respondent has not filed any counter affidavit in the matter. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent. 5. Evidently, the award has to be satisfied by the respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that even though there was an appeal before this Court, the same was dismissed and thereafter the respondent approached the Supreme Court and the Special Leave Petition was also dismissed. Therefore, there cannot be any refusal on the part of the respondent to deposit the amount. But in spite of the interim order, so far the amount has not been deposited. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that since the award is already passed, it is up to the petitioner to seek execution through legal wpc 32353/2008 3 means. It is true that the petitioner and other claimants will have to proceed with the execution of the award. But in a matter like this, where the respondent is a public authority and what is sought for is only a mandamus, especially in the light of the peculiar facts of this case, it cannot be said that this Court is not having jurisdiction to issue a direction to the respondent to deposit the amount. Further, even after the interim order was passed, no counter affidavit has been filed, opposing any of the prayers. 7. In that view of the matter, there will be a direction to the respondent to deposit the amount awarded in O.P.(M.V.) No.1915/2001, along with the interest up to date and the cost portion of the award, within six weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment, before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/