IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2010 / 7TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 23772 of 2010(V) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- T.C.RAJAN, AGED 46 YEARS, SON OF SRI.CHANDRAN, RESIDING AT THAIPARAMBIL HOUSE, KURUMASSERY P.O., PARAKKADAVU (VIA), ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.ANIL S.RAJ, SMT.K.N.RAJANI, SRI.RADHIKA RAJASEKHARAN. P, SMT.ANILA PETER. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. SRI.SANOJ, AGED 32 YEARS, SON OF SRI.RAMAKRISHNAN, RESIDING AT PARAKKULAM HOUSE, KURUMASSERY DESOM, PARAKKADAVU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683 579. 2. SRI.VINOD, SON OF SRI.KUTTAPPAN, RESIDING AT MOOKKOLI HOUSE, KURUMASSERY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT – 683 579. 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD., ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT – 683 101. 4. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, ALUVA – 683 101. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= W.P.(C) No. 23772 of 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 29th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT Petitioner who is stated as the owner of a 'tempo van' has approached this Court because of the recovery proceedings, as borne by Exts.P2 and P3, under the Revenue Recovery Act, in the course of steps taken for realization of the amount due under Ext.P1 Award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakuda, fixing the liability upon the petitioner. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the vehicle bearing registration No.KEH 4204 belonging to the petitioner collided with a bus bearing registration No.KL-7 M 1789, causing injuries to a person who was travelling in the vehicle belonging to the petitioner, leading to filing of O.P. (MV) No.683 of 2002 by the injured before the Tribunal claiming compensation. On conclusion of the trial, the Tribunal passed an Award granting compensation, however, absolved the Insurer from the liability, stating that W.P.(C) No. 23772/2010 2 the person concerned who was a representative of the petitioner was not covered by the terms of the Policy. The learned counsel submits that the finding and reasoning given by the Tribunal is not proper and that the petitioner wants to challenge Ext.P1 Award by availing statutory appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act. It is also stated that, in spite of filing necessary application to obtain certified copy of the Award, it is still to be obtained and that the petitioner might be given some breathing time to avail the statutory remedy. 3. Heard learned Government Pleader appearing for the fourth respondent as well. 4. Considering the limited request made by the petitioner, this Court finds that no notice needs be issued to the respondents 1 to 3, who are the claimant, driver and insurer of the concerned vehicle. 5. If aggrieved of the Award, it is for the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedy available under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act. So as to enable the petitioner to W.P.(C) No. 23772/2010 3 pursue such remedy, the coercive proceedings pursuant to Exts.P2 and P3 shall be kept in abeyance for a period of one month. The writ petition is disposed of as above. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. mn.