IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 21ST MAY 2009 / 31ST VAISAKHA 1931 WP(C).No. 8304 of 2009(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SINDHU, AGED 32, W/O.GOPAKUMAR, VISHNU BHAVAN, T.C.28/257/A, OTTUKAL STREET, KAITHAMUKKU, PETTAH, P.O.THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.V.VIJULAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. PANKAJARAJAN, VILAYILAZHIKATHU VEEDU, EZHUKONE P.O., KOLLAM. 2. THE MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., P.B.NO.8, VIJAYANAGAR BUILDINGS PULAMON P.O., KOTTARAKKARA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).8304/2009 -------------------- Dated this the 21st day of May, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner's husband allegedly met with a serious accident. According to the petitioner, her husband is lying in a comatose state and therefore, unable to move about. She therefore, filed a petition under the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation on behalf of her husband describing herself as next friend. The learned Tribunal conducted a preliminary enquiry, but has not so far directed the Original Petition to be numbered. This Court called for a report from the MACT, Thiruvananthapuram and by communication dated 8.4.2009, it has been reported that the medical certificate issued from the Ananthapuri Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram, produced by the petitioner did not reveal the condition of the injured; nor have records been produced to demonstrate the relationship between the petitioner and the injured. W.P.(C).8304/2009 2 2. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader and having perused the averments in the writ petition, I am of the view that it will be appropriate that the Tribunal directs numbering of the petition. Thereafter, petitioner could be called upon to produce all the materials to convince the Tribunal that the injured is disabled to the extent to which he is unable to prosecute the proceedings himself and requires the help of a next friend. Tribunal can also call upon the petitioner to produce sufficient evidence to show that she is competent to represent the injured. Obviously an enquiry would be necessary in this case and numbering of the petition need not be deferred till then. 3. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of directing the MACT, Thiruvananthapuram, to direct the numbering of Ext.P1 petition presented before it W.P.(C).8304/2009 3 and then proceed further in accordance with law. Copy of the judgment along with the copy of the writ petition shall be placed by the petitioner on record before the MACT for its perusal. Writ petition is disposed of as above. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs