IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 4TH JANUARY 2011 / 14TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 8375 of 2010(V) ----------------------- OPMV.481/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA .................. PETITIONER : -------------------- V.S.BABU,S/O.SANKU,VANPARAMBIL HOUSE, THANISSERY.P.O, IRINJALAKUDA. BY ADV. SRI.C. DILIP RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, MUKUNDAPURAM. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MANAVALASSERY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. SUMATHY, KARANATH HOUSE, KANAKAMALA DESOM, MANAKAMALA.P.O, KODAKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 4. VISHNU, KARANATH HOUSE, KANAKAMALA DESOM, KANAKAMALA.P.O, KODAKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, MINOR, REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER SUMATHY. 5. KAUSALYA, KARANATH HOUSE, KANAKAMALA DESOM, KANAKAMALA.P.O, KODAKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.8375 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- The petitioner herein is the 1st respondent in O.P (MV).481/03 on the files of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda. A Tipper Lorry owned by the petitioner was involved in a motor accident, which resulted in the death of a person named Sivan. The claim petition in question was filed by the wife and children of the deceased. In Ext.P1 award the Tribunal had allowed compensation to the tune of Rs.3,10,000/- along with interest. Having found that the vehicle in question was not having any valid insurance on the date of the accident, the amount was directed to be paid by the petitioner as well as by the 2nd respondent in Ext.P1 award, who was the driver of the vehicle. It is evident that Ext.P1 award has attained finality since the petitioner has not challenged the award by filing any statutory appeal. At the instance of respondents 3 to 5 herein, who are the claimants before the Tribunal, recovery steps were initiated and Ext.P2 and P3 are the revenue recovery notices issued on the basis of certificate forwarded by the Tribunal. W.P.(C).8375/10-V -2- 2. According to the petitioner, the respondents 1 and 2 have taken coercive steps and the immovable property belonging to him was proceeded against. It is stated that the petitioner is not in a position to pay off the liability in a lump sum. Hence the petitioner seeks direction to permit payment of the amounts due in instalments. 3. Eventhough the notice issued from this court was served on respondents 3 and 4, they have not chosen to enter appearance or contest the matter. Pursuant to interim orders issued by this court on 15.2.2010 and on 23.11.2010, it is stated that, the petitioner had remitted a total sum of Rs.2 lakhs. It is also stated that the petitioner had deposited a sum of Rs.25,000/- before the M.A.C.T. 4. Under the above circumstances I am of the view that indulgence can be shown in permitting the petitioner to pay off the entire balance outstanding, in a phased manner, within a reasonable time. 5. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directing respondents 1 and 2 to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps of recovery, provided the petitioner remits the entire balance outstanding in 5 (five) equal monthly instalments falling due on or before 31.1.2011 and on or before the last day of the succeeding months. W.P.(C).8375/10-V -3- 6. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments, the respondents will be at liberty to proceed with further steps and on such event the petitioner will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb