IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 33270 of 2010(G) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- A.M.MUHAMMED ALI, ARIYANKALAYIL HOUSE, MARKET P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADVS. SRI.LIJU.V.STEPHEN, SRI.EBY AUGUSTINE, SMT.INDU SUSAN JACOB. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. TAHSILDAR, MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN-686 673. 2. MATHAI GEORGE, S/O. MATHAI, CONICKAL HOUSE, THODUPUZHA-685 584. 3. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., MUVATTUPUZHA-686 673. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN R3 BY ADV. SRI. GEORGE CHERIAN, THIRUVALLA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.33270 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Petitioner is challenging the recovery steps initiated pursuant to Ext.P2 and P3 notices, issued under the provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968. The amount sought to be realised pertains to dues to the 3rd respondent under the terms of Ext.P1 award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thodupuzha, in OP(MV).510/2001. 2. It is stated that the petitioner had already filed appeal against Ext.P1, which is registered as MACA.No.53/2010 before this court. According to the petitioner, he could not seek interim orders in the appeal, because there is delay in filing the appeal and it has not been condoned so far. This court had already issued notice on the delay condonation application. It is stated that unless the delay is condoned the petitioner is not in a position to approach the appellate court seeking interim relief. Under the above circumstances the petitioner is limiting his prayer only for restraining the coercive steps of recovery for a short period, in order to facilitate him to move before the appellate court W.P.(C).33270/10-G -2- seeking appropriate interim reliefs. 3. Heard Sri.George Cherian, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent. Considering the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that coercive steps of recovery now initiated can be held on for a reasonable period, in order to facilitate the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy from the appellate court. 4. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to keep in abeyance all further steps of recovery initiated pursuant to Ext.P2 and P3 notices for a period of two months from today. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb