IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 13TH AUGUST 2010 / 22ND SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 23665 of 2010(G) -------------------------- OPMV.1425/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.C.RAJAPPAN, S/O. CHATHA, AGED 55 YEARS PALAKKUZHI HOUSE, MARANGATTULLI KARA, THIRUVANIYOOR P.O.,PUTHENCRUZ. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE ERNAKULAM - 682030. 3. TAHSILDAR 9REVENUE RECOVERY) TALUK OFFICE, PERUMBAVOOR - 683542. 4. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, PERUMBAVOOR. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No. 23665 of 2010-G ---------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of August, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner sustained some injuries in a road traffic accident, involving the vehicle bearing No.KBV-8015, leading to the claim petition preferred as O.P(MV) No.1425 of 2001 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha, which culminated in Ext.P1 Award granting a total compensation of Rs.27,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum, from the date of application till the date of deposit. 2. However, in view of the observation that, the vehicle was caused to be driven without valid driving license and the infringement of the statutory/policy conditions, the Insurer was directed to satisfy the amount, with liberty to have it recovered from the owner and driver of the vehicle. Being aggrieved of the Award, the driver preferred M.A.C.A No.1080 of 2006 before this Court and after hearing the parties concerned, this Court passed Ext.P2 judgment, whereby a positive finding was rendered, holding that, the claimant had not succeeded in proving the case and hence he W.P(C) No. 23665 of 2010-G 2 was not entitled to have any compensation. In the said circumstances, the said appeal was allowed and the claim petition was dismissed, making it clear that the amount paid by the appellant/driver or the insurer, as the case may be, shall be given back. 3. Pursuant to the above verdict, the revenue recovery notice has been issued as borne by Exts.P3 and P3(a), at the instance of the insurer; on receipt of which, the petitioner preferred Ext.P4 representation before the second respondent/District Collector, requesting for granting the benefit of instalments so as to satisfy the liability. The petitioner is stated as aggrieved of the coercive proceedings being pursued against him without considering the request for instalments. 4. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 5. Inspite of issuance of urgent notice on admission and service of the same, the insurer has not chosen to appear before this Court. 6. In the above facts and circumstances, considering the persuasive submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court finds it fit and proper to permit the petitioner W.P(C) No. 23665 of 2010-G 3 to discharge the liability in a phased manner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to clear the liability by way of 'ten' equal monthly instalments; the first of which shall be effected on or before the 15th of September, 2010; to be followed by similar instalments to be effected on or before the 15th of the succeeding months. Subject to the above, all further coercive proceedings pursuant to Exts.P3 and P3(a) shall be kept in abeyance for the time being. It is made clear that, if any default is committed by the petitioner in satisfying the due amount as above, it will be open to the respondents, to proceed with further steps for realisation of the entire amount in a lump. The Writ Petition is disposed of. Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge ab W.P(C) No. 23665 of 2010-G 4