IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2009 / 5TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 4740 of 2009(M) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- K.KUNHABDULLAH, S/O.ABDUL RAHIMAN, H.NO.25/81, MUNEERA MANZIL, KANHANGAD VILLAGE KANHANGAD SOUTH PO, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.P.K.PRIYA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. BRANCH MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY, BRANCH OFFICE, CITY POINT BUILDING, PRESS CLUB JN., M.G.ROAD, KASARAGOD. 2. MOHAMMED ABDUL HAMEED, S/O.MOHAMMED KUNHI, KOLLAMPARA HOUSE, BALAL POST, KARINDALAM VILLAGE, VIA,ANANDASHRAM, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD. 3. SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR(RR), HOSDURG, PO.KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD. BY MR.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R1 MR.P.JACOB MATHEW FOR R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.P.K.BABU FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.4740/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 22.7.08 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P2:- COPY OF THE AWARD PASSED BY THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KASARAGOD IN OP(MV) NO.738/04 DT. 23.4.07. P3:- COPY OF THE IA. 233/09 ION OP(MV) NO.738/04 ON THE FILE OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KASARAGOD. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE TSS P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 4740 of 2009 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 27th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT The motor cycle bearing No. KL14 D 6753 owned by the petitioner knocked down a pedestrian on 14.9.2004, which led to OP (MV) 738 of 2004, wherein Ext.P2 award was passed by the Tribunal. The owner and rider of the vehicle chose to remain ex parte and on substantiating the breach of the policy condition involving the absence of valid licence, the Tribunal permitted the insurer of the vehicle to have the amount duly recovered from the owner (petitioner herein) after satisfying the liability to the injured. The petitioner herein, who was abroad at the relevant time, states that, he was not duly served with any notice issued by the Tribunal and hence has already approached the MACT by filing Ext.P3 petition for setting aside the ex parte award. The case of the petitioner is that, it is without any regard to the pendency of the said petition, that Ext.P2 demand notice has been issued under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, which hence is sought to be intercepted in the Writ Petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent/Insurance Company and also the Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the 3rd respondent as well. Even though notice was issued to the second respondent (rider of the vehicle), the same WP (C) No. 4740 of 2009 : 2 : has been returned as 'not known', despite the fact that the address given in the Writ Petition is the very same address as given before the Tribunal, in which address the service was completed before the Tribunal, later declaring him as exparte, as he did not choose to turn up. However, in view of the verdict proposed to be passed, this Court does not find it necessary to direct the petitioner to have substituted service as provided under Order V Rule 20 of the Civil Procedure Code. 3. In the above facts and circumstances, Ext.P3 petition (I.A. 233 of 2009 in O.P. (MV) 738 of 2004) stated as pending before the MACT, Kasargod is directed to be considered and disposed of, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment before the MACT as above. It is made clear that, till such final orders are passed on Ext.P3, all further steps pursuant to Ext.P1, for realization of the amount from the petitioner, shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd