IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 16TH OCTOBER 2009 / 24TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 29191 of 2009(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SAJIMON XAVIER, PALLIVATHUKKAL HOUSE, VADAYAR VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.BABY KURIAKOSE SRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. M.P.BOSE, S/O.PADMANABHAN, KRISHNALAYAM HOUSE, IRUMPAYAM P.O., VELLOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. GEORGEKUTTY, S/O.KURIAN, PUNNACKAKKUZHY HOUSE, POTHY P.O., VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., REP. BY MANAGER, MUNDUKOTTAKKAL CHAMBERS, KANJIKUZHY, KOTTAYAM-4. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VADAYAR VILLAGE, P.O.VADAYAR, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MATHEW VADAKKEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.29191 OF 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 16th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. Petitioner is aggrieved by the revenue recovery proceedings initiated against him pursuant to issuance of Ext.P4(a) and P4(b) notices for realisation of the amount covered under Ext.P2 award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kottayam in OP(MV).2026/99. According to the petitioner he is implicated as a respondent in the claim petition before the Tribunal since he was the owner of the vehicle, which involved in the accident. But no notice with respect to the proceedings by the Tribunal was received by the petitioner, is the contention. It is further contended that inspite of existence of a valid insurance policy the claimant before the Tribunal had not impleaded the insurer of the vehicle. Further it is stated that the petitioner came to know about the award only when he received notice in the execution petition. It is submitted that eventhough the counsel was engaged to take appropriate steps in the matter, no appeal against the award nor any application to set aside the exparte award was filed so far. It is further submitted that the petitioner had already received certified copy of Ext.P2 award and he is intending to file appeal before this W.P.(C).29191/09-T 2 court within few days. Limited request of the petitioner is to keep in abeyance coercive steps of recovery for facilitating him to file appeal and move before the appellate court seeking stay against execution of the award. 2. Having considered facts and circumstances of the case I am inclined to direct the respondents to keep further coercive steps in abeyance for facilitating the petitioner to move before the appellate court. 3. Under the above circumstances the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents 4 and 5 to keep in abeyance further recovery steps initiated pursuant to Ext.P4(a) and P4(b) notices, for a period of one month from today, for facilitating the petitioner to move before the appellate court. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb