IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 6TH JUNE 2011 / 16TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 9967 of 2011(U) ------------------------- PETITIONER:- ------------------ MATHEW,S/O.CHACKOCHAN,KATHIRAMKUNNEL HOUSE,MUDAVOOR.P.O,VELLOORKUNNAM VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.C.N.SAMEER RESPONDENTS:- --------------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR(RR),TALUK OFFICE, MUVATTUPUZHA-686661. ADDL.2. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY, MUVATTUPUZHA – 686 661, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. ( IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN IA.NO.7821/2011 DTD.26.5.2011 GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN FOR R1. ADV. SRI.A.A.MOHAMMED NAZIR FOR ADDL.R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.9967 of 2011-U. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 6th June, 2011. J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the 2nd respondent in Ext.P5 common Award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha, in OP(MV)Nos.1617, 1618, 1619 and 1620 of 2004. Petitioner was the driver of the vehicle which involved in the accident on the relevant date of the accident. By virtue of Ext.P5, different amounts of compensation was awarded to the respective claimants. The Addl.2nd respondent herein, who is the insurer of the vehicle concerned, was directed to make deposit of the amounts with liberty reserved to recover such amounts from the petitioner as well as from the 1st respondent in Ext.P5 common Award, who is the owner of the vehicle. 2. According to the petitioner, he was ex-parte before the Tribunal. Contention of the petitioner is that he is not liable for payment of the amounts fixed through WP(C).No.9967 of 2011-U. 2 Ext.P5. However, it is stated that the petitioner had already filed petitions before the Tribunal for setting aside the ex- parte Award, along with petitions seeking condonation of delay, as evidenced from Exts.P6 to P13. Grievance of the petitioner is that pending consideration and disposal of those petitions by the Tribunal, coercive steps of recovery has now been initiated on the basis of Exts.P1 to P4 notices issued under the provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. 3. Heard; Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent. Considering the fact that petitions filed seeking to set aside ex-parte Award is now pending consideration and disposal before the Tribunal, I am of the view that interest of justice will be served if a direction is issued to the Tribunal to expedite the matter and till then to restrain the respondents from proceeding with coercive steps of recovery. 4. Under the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Motor Accidents Claims WP(C).No.9967 of 2011-U. 3 Tribunal, Muvattupuzha to consider and dispose of Exts.P6 to P13 petitions, after affording reasonable opportunity to all parties concerned, at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. 5. Till such time the petitions are disposed of as directed above, all further coercive steps of recovery initiated against the petitioner, pursuant to Exts.P1 to P4, shall be kept in abeyance. 6. However, it is made clear that the above direction will not stand in the way of the 1st respondent proceeding against other defaulter, who is the 1st respondent in Ext.P5 common Award. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, (Judge) Kvs/-