Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 14885
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 14TH ASWINA, 1944 OP (MAC) NO. 72 OF 2022 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OPMV 323/2019 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, OTTAPPALAM PETITIONERS:
1 VIPINLAL AGED 31 YEARS, S/O CHAKKAN, KANTHALATH VALAPPIL HOUSE, THIRUMATTAKODE P.O, PALAKKAD DISTRICT , PIN - 679553
2 PRABHAKARAN AGED 55 YEARS, S/O SHANKARAN, KUNNATHU VEEDU, PALLUR P.O, DESAMANGALAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 679532 BY ADVS.
ANAND KALYANAKRISHNAN C.DHEERAJ RAJAN RESPONDENTS:
1 NARAYANAN K.P AGE NOT KNOWN, S/O PARAMESWARAN NAMBOOTHIRI, KOOKAMPARA MANA, KAVALAPPARA P.O, SHORNUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT , PIN - 679523
2 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD THRISSUR CLAIM HUB, 2ND FLOOR, PERINCHERY BUILDING, ROUND NORTH, THRISSUR, PIN - 680001 BY ADV RAJAN P.KALIYATH THIS OP (MAC) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J. -------------------------------- OP(MAC) No.72 of 2022 ----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 06th day of October, 2022
JUDGMENT
This original petition is filed with following prayers: i. Direct the MACT Ottapalam to consider and pass appropriate orders in Ext.P2 and Ext.P3 applications preferred by the petitioners as expeditiously as possible.
ii. Stay all further proceedings initiated to recover the amount consequent to Ext.P1 award passed by MACT, Ottapalam till orders are passed in Ext.P2 and Ext.P3 applications pending before MACT Ottapalam.
iii. Grant such other relief deemed fit to this Hon’ble court. (SIC)
2. When this original petition came up for consideration, the counsel for the petitioners submitted that he will be satisfied if a direction is issued to the Tribunal to consider and pass appropriate orders in Exts.P2 and P3 within a time frame. Ext.P2 is an application to condone the delay in filing the petition for setting aside the exparte order and Ext.P3 is the petition to set aside the exparte order.
3. Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the counsel for the 2nd respondent. Though notice was issued to the 1st respondent, there is no appearance. If the 1st respondent is aggrieved by this judgment, he is free to file a review petition before this Court.
4. Since the prayer is for a consideration of the petition to set aside the exparte order, I think the same can be allowed. But I make it clear that the Tribunal is free to pass appropriate orders in those applications in accordance to law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and other affected parties.
Therefore, this original petition is disposed of in the following manner:
1. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ottapalam is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders in Exts.P2 and P3, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and other affected parties, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
2. Till final orders are passed in the above applications, all recovery proceedings against the petitioners are deferred.
