IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 25TH AUGUST 2008 / 3RD BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 33361 of 2007(V) -------------------------- OPMV.279/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR .................... PETITIONER: --------------- REETHA, AGED 67, W/O.LATE THOMAS, CHEERAN VEEDU, ERANELLUR P.O., THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. M.B.ANIL, S/O.BHASKARAN, MELVEETTIL HOUSE, MELOOR P.O., THRISSUR. 2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., 'U' BROTHERS BUILDING, GURUVAYOOR ROAD, KUNNAMKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB (SR.) FOR R2 SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 33361 OF 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 25th day of August 2008 J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext. P2 order passed by the Tribunal in I.A. No. 2622/06 in O.P.(MV) No. 279/03. 2. For the non-appearance of the claimant, the O.P. was dismissed on 1.10.2005. Belatedly, an application for restoration was filed and that resulted in Ext. P2. By this order the Tribunal allowed restoration on payment of cost of Rs.500/- to be remitted with the District Legal Service Authority within 15 days from 31.5.2007. According to the counsel, the case was called on 16.6.2007 and on the ground of non-remittance, the case was dismissed. 3. Petitioner submits that she went to the office of the District Legal Service Authority on 16.6.2007 (wrongly stated as 15.6.2007) and it being a Saturday the office was closed and therefore the payment could not be made. According to the petitioner, it is in these circumstances, the order could not be complied with and that W.P.(C) No. 33361 OF 2008 -2- facts being so, the dismissal ought not have been ordered. 4. Notice in this writ petition to the 1st respondent is returned with the endorsement 'not known'. Though counsel entered appearance on behalf of the 2nd respondent they have not filed any counter in this writ petition. Though I have heard him, I find that the objection is formal in nature. 5. Evidently the claimant could not pay the cost ordered by the Tribunal, as the last date of payment was a holiday which led to non-compliance of Ext. P2 and dismissal of the claim. It is in this background the petitioner is seeking an order to modify the direction issued under Ext. P2 for payment of the cost so that the order can be complied with. 6. Having regard to the peculiar facts highlighted above, I am satisfied that the petitioner should be given yet another opportunity to comply with Ext. P2 order so that the case could be contested on merits. Accordingly, I direct that if the petitioner remits cost ordered against her in Ext. P2 within 10 days from today, that will be accepted as in compliance with Ext. P2 and on that basis, it will W.P.(C) No. 33361 OF 2008 -3- be open to the petitioner to seek appropriate orders in the Tribunal for getting the case restored to file. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-