IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2009 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1931 FAO.No. 148 of 2005() --------------------- I.A. 1788/04 IN OPMV.5/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, OTTAPALAM .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------------------ MAHALINGAM, S/O.BALASUBRAMANIAM CHETTIAR, KARIVADAM, POST THAVALAM,MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.SREEHARI RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------------------- 1. K.LATHAMANI, W/O.V.KANAKARAJ, RESIDING AT DOOR NO. 407, WARD NO.7, PADAVAYAL, PALOOR POST, ATTAPADI, MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. V.BALASUBRAMANIAM, S/O.VENKITARAMAN, RESIDING AT DOOR NO.9/157, MAIN ROAD, ANAIKATTY, COIMBATORE. 3. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BRANCH OFFICE AT COIMBATORE, TAMIL NADU. ADV. SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN FOR R1 SRI.A.R.GEORGE FOR R3 THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & P. BHAVADASAN, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - F.A.O. No. 148 of 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 27th day of May, 2009 JUDGMENT Raman, J, The appeal is by the first respondent in O.P.(MV) 5 of 2002 on the file of MACT, Ottapalam. He was the rider of the vehicle, which involved in the accident. There was no valid insurance for the vehicle in question. The appellant, though received summons, misplaced the same and he could not engage a lawyer, as a result of which an ex-parte award was eventually passed against the appellant. Application to set aside the ex-parte award was dismissed, against which the present appeal is preferred. 2. It is the case of the appellant that there was a criminal case pending before the Munsiff's Court, Mannarkkad and he was eventually acquitted as per order in S.T. 1847 of 1999. Thinking that the MACT case would have been there, he enquired with the lawyer there and he could not get proper FAO.148/2005. 2 information as to where the MACT case is pending. It is when the execution notice was received, he came to know that an award was passed against him ex-parte. 3. While granting stay this court directed the appellant to deposit a sum of Rs.20,000/-. Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the amount had been deposited, though proof of such deposit is not produced. 4. After verifying the records and on an appreciation of the entire facts, we think that this is a fit case where an opportunity can be given to the appellant provided he had deposited the sum of Rs.20,000/- as directed by this court before the execution court. Accordingly, we allow this appeal, set aside the award passed by the MACT , Ottapalam in O.P.(MV) 5 of 2002 as against the appellant and the case is restored to file. In case the amount of Rs.20,000/- is not seen deposited before the execution court, it is open to the execution court to proceed with the execution for the FAO.148/2005. 3 realisation of the balance amount also and whatever amount realised from the appellant will be given due credit in case eventually an award has been passed against him. The parties shall appear before the MACT, Ottappalam on 15.7.2009. P.R. Raman, Judge P. Bhavadasan, Judge sb.