IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2010 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 36457 of 2010(F) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- MATHEW @ SABU, S/O. AUGUSTINE, KIZHAKKEPARAYIDATHIL, MUTHOLAPURAM KARA, MUTHOLAPURAM P.O., ELANJI VILLAGE. BY ADVS. SRI.K.R.KURUP SRI. C.R.VINOD KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KAKKANADU, ERNAKULAM.KOCHI- 682 030 2. TAHASILDAR MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK OFFICE, MUVATTUPUZHA.686 661 3. VILLAGE OFFICER ELANJI VILLAGE OFFICE, ELANJI, MUVATTUPUZHA.686 665 * ADDL.R4 IS IMPLEADED * ADDLR4: THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LIMITED, MUVATTUPUZHA. 686 661. *ADDL.R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 14/12/2010 IN I.A.17376/2010. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.36457 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of December, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Petitioner is the 1st respondent before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pala in O.P(MV) No.785/05, in which Ext.P1 Award was passed directing payment of compensation to the claimant therein, to the tune of Rs.34,360/- along with interest and cost. The 2nd respondent therein, who is the additional 4th respondent impleaded in this writ petition, was directed to make deposit of the amount of compensation with liberty to recover the same from the petitioner. Pursuant to the deposit made by the 4th respondent, the Tribunal was moved for realising the amounts from the petitioner. On the basis of intimation issued by the Tribunal, steps for revenue recovery was initiated against the petitioner, on the basis of Ext.P2 notices under Sections 7 and 34 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968. 2. According to the petitioner, the liability was fetched upon him since the Tribunal found that the vehicle in question which involved in the accident was not having valid fitness certificate on the date of accident. It is stated that the vehicle was having fitness certificate on the relevant date and the W.P.(C).36457/10-F -2- petitioner could not produce the same before the Tribunal, since he was set ex-parte in the proceedings. It is submitted that the petitioner is taking appropriate steps to challenge Ext.P1 award either by filing appeal before this court or by filing review petition before the Tribunal. Under such premise the petitioner is seeking direction to restrain the coercive steps of recovery for a reasonable period, in order to facilitate the petitioner to take appropriate legal steps. 3. Heard; Standing Counsel appearing for additional 4th respondent. Considering the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that interest of justice will be served if the respondents 2 and 3 are restrained from taking coercive steps for a short period, in order to facilitate the petitioner to move before the appropriate authority. 4. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents 2 and 3 to keep in abeyance all further steps pursuant to Ext.P2 notice, for a period of two months from today, in order to facilitate the petitioner to approach appropriate forum challenging Ext.P1 award of the Tribunal. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb