Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 9481

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J
SUDHEER K.S. – Appellant
Versus
MANOJ A.V – Respondent
OP (MAC) NO. 120 OF 2019

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.KEERTHI DEVI K.V., SRI.P.J.JOE PAUL, SMT.ASHLY MATHEW, SHRI.M.R.HARIKRISHNAN

The court reaffirmed that delay in filing a review must be justified and alternative remedies lie in appeal.

Headnote:The petitioner challenged the dismissal of the review application in O.P(MV) No.749 of 2006 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal due to a delay of 852 days. The Tribunal dismissed the application, stating there were no valid grounds for condonation of delay. The primary issue was whether the Tribunal erred in refusing to condone the delay. The Court concluded that the relief should be sought through an appeal rather than a review petition, reaffirming existing legal standards. The Court ultimately dismissed the original petition.

Table of Content
1. the grounds for condonation of delay must be valid and remedies lie in appealing. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is aggrieved by Exts.P5 and P6, through which an application filed seeking review of the award in O.P(MV) No.749 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-I, Alappuzha, dated 22.08.2016, was dismissed, consequent to the dismissal of the application to set aside the delay in filing the review petition.

2. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal found no reason for condoning the delay of 852 days in filing the review petition.

3. Going through the orders impugned, I do not find any illegality in declining the review petitions, warranting interference in this original petition. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the award passed, the remedy lies in challenging the same by filing an appeal. Without prejudice to the said right, this original petition is dismissed.

SD/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 9481

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMMOHAMMED NIAS C.P., JSUDHEER K.S. – AppellantVersusMANOJ A.V – RespondentOP (MAC) NO. 120 OF 2019

The court reaffirmed that delay in filing a review must be justified and alternative remedies lie in appeal.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J
SUDHEER K.S. – Appellant
Versus
MANOJ A.V – Respondent
OP (MAC) NO. 120 OF 2019