Dismissed

Florencia Elias v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Apr 2009WP(C)/6604/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala, in a writ petition filed by children of a deceased road accident victim, directed the District Collector to consider and disburse the balance ex-gratia amount of Rs.40,000 promised for the victim's dependants. The court also addressed the availability of the GPF closure amount mentioned in petitioner exhibits.

What did the court decide?

Directed the second respondent (District Collector) to consider the claim for the balance ex-gratia amount of Rs.40,000 and disburse any amount found payable within three months.

Florencia Elias Vs State of Kerala — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 2ND APRIL 2009 / 12TH CHAITHRA 1931

¶5

WP(C).No. 6604 of 2007(J)

¶6

----------------------------------PETITIONERS:

¶7

¶8

FLORENCIA ELIAS, HOUSE NO.22, TC.1/203, ST.STEPHENS LANE, PALLITHURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶9

GODWIN ELIAS, AGED 19 YEARS, S/O.LATE G. ELIAS, HOUSE NO.22,

¶10

TC.1/203, ST.STEPHENS LANE, PALLITHURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

SALWIN ELIAS, AGED 14 YEARS, S/O.LATE G. ELIAS (MINOR, REPRESENTED BY MOTHER FLORENCIA ELIAS) HOUSE NO.22, T.C.1/203, ST.STEPHENS LANE, PALLITHURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

MELWIN ELIAS, AGED 9 YEARS, S/O.LATE G. ELIAS (MINOR, REPRESENTED BY MOTHER FLORENCIA ELIAS) HOUSE NO.22, TC.1/203, ST.STEPHENS LANE, PALLITHURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY

¶14

RESPONDENTS:

¶15

¶16

THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶17

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶18

THE CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER, INDIAN AUDIT & ACCOUNTS DEPT., O/O.THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL KERALA, M.G. ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶19

THE JOINT DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE HIGHWAY RESEARCH INSTITUTE, KARIYAVATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶20

SRI. V. TEK CHAND, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/04/2009 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

WP(C).No. 6604/ 2007

¶23

APPENDIX

¶24

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

¶25

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM PUBLISHED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY ON 5/03/2006.

¶26

EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE POST MORTEM REPORT DATED 5/03/2006. EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE SERVICE DETAILS DATD 14/11/2006. EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF HEIRSHIP CERTIFICATE DATED 24/06/2006. EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 24/01/2007. EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF ITEM PUBLISHED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY ON 15/02/2007.

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE

pac

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶31

W.P.(C) No.6604 OF 2007

¶32

Dated this the 2^nd day of April, 2009

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

The petitioner's husband, while returning home from the place of work, was knocked down on the road by a KSRTC bus causing serious injuries leading to his death on 04.03.2006. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents 3 and 4 have refused to disburse the GPF closure amount mentioned under Ext.P5, insisting for production of guardianship certificate and further against the non-disbursement of the ex-gratia amount of Rs.50,000/- promised as payable to the dependants of the victim by the second respondent/District Collector, as appeared in Ext.P1 newspaper report.

¶35

When the above matter came up for admission before this Court on 27.02.2007, instruction was sought for as to the availability of the said sum of Rs.50,000/- payable as ex-gratia, and as to the other reliefs prayed for. Subsequently, an interim order was passed on 21.03.2007 observing that, if 'heirship certificate' is produced following Ext.P5, 'guardianship certificate' need not be insisted, on the petitioner's executing

¶36

W.P.(C) No.6604 of 2007

¶37

¶38

an indemnity bond for the collection of funds on behalf of the minor children as well. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the first prayer sought for in the writ petition stands satisfied particularly in the light of the interim order passed by this Court on 21.03.2007. With regard to the second relief prayed for, the learned counsel submits that the petitioner has been given only a sum of Rs.10,000/- and the remaining extent of 40,000/- is still due.

¶39

No counter affidavit has been filed from the part of the respondents and no instruction is available as to the extent or availability of Rs.50,000/- stated as payable towards ex-gratia as proclaimed by the second respondent/District Collector vide Ext.P1 newspaper report. Even though this Court is well aware that no reliance can be placed on such newspaper reports and no decision can be arrived at on that basis, it is reasonably presumed that the declaration as above was made by the second respondent/District Collector taking note of the availability by such amounts. More so, when no counter affidavit has been filed by the said respondent, in spite of the instructions sought for by this Court as observed in the

¶40

W.P.(C) No.6604 of 2007

¶41

¶42

proceedings dated 27.02.2007.

¶43

In the above facts and circumstances, the second respondent is hereby directed to consider the claim of the petitioners for obtaining the balance amount of Rs.40,000/payable as ex-gratia amount in respect of the death of the first petitioner's husband caused in the road accident on 04.03.2006 and the amount if any found payable, shall be disbursed as early as possible and at any rate within three months from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. The petitioners shall produce a copy of the judgment before the second respondent for proceeding with further steps.

¶44

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶45

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE

¶46

pac

Florencia Elias v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Florencia Elias v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sukumaran Nair K.R. Vs State of Kerala

Sindu Bernard Vs State of Kerala and Another

R.Ayyappan Nair Vs the Chief Postmaster General

R.S.Sasikumar Vs State of Kerala

C.v.Varghese Vs State of Kerala

Paul Varghese Vs Keralal Water Authority