IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 5TH JULY 2010 / 14TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 13654 of 2010(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHANTAMMA KESAVAN, MANJU BHAVAN,CHITTAPALAM P.O., SULTAN BATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,KOTTAYAM. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, (REVENUE RECOVERY), KOTTAYAM. BY G.P. SRI I.V.PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 13654 of 2010(F) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS - P1 - TRUE COPY F REQUEST SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER TO R1 DT. 17/3/2010 P2 - TRUE COPY F ORDER IN IA 809/2010 INMACA 2858/2009 DT. 29/3/2010 P3 - TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 31/3/2010 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER TO 1ST RESPONDENT. P4 - TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF MACT, PALA IN EA 10/2010 INEP 135/2009 IN OP(MV) 1015/2006 DATED 9.4.2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) 13654 of 2010 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated: JULY 5, 2010 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. Petitioner claims that she is the absolute owner of a stage carriage bearing registration No.KL-05/W 6062. According to her, she had purchased the said vehicle from Mrs. Indira Manoharan, on the strength of an agreement for sale dated April 15, 2008. 2. But the grievance of the petitioner is that the above vehicle has been attached by the respondents for recovery of the award amount in OP(MV) 1015/2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pala. The above award has been passed in connection with an accident involving another vehicle (KL-5/T 5744) belonging to Mrs. Indira Manoharan. In this case the Tribunal found that the above vehicle was being driven by a driver who did not possess a valid licence at the time of the accident and therefore the owner was liable to pay the compensation to the victim. 3. Today we have disposed of M.A.C.A. 2858/2009 preferred by Mrs. Indira Manoharan remanding the case to the Tribunal for fresh consideration in accordance with law. 4. It is contended by the petitioner that attachment of her W.P.(C) 13654/2010 2 vehicle is not at all justified or warranted. She had submitted Ext.P1 representation before respondent No.1 on March 17, 2010 requesting the said authority to release the vehicle to her. But respondent No.1 has not passed any orders on Ext.P1 till date. 5. The only prayer in this writ petition is to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or such other appropriate writ or direction to the respondents to release the vehicle referred to above to the petitioner forthwith. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the materials available on record, we are of the view that the petitioner has to necessarily pursue her remedy before respondent No.1. The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 to consider and pass orders on Ext.P1 in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE mt/-