Disposed

Muthamma v. Union of India

Kerala HC24 Oct 2011WP(C)/1398/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a writ petition filed by the wife of an Indian national who died while working in Oman. The petitioner sought a direction to the diplomatic representatives to expedite the claim for death compensation from the Sultanate of Oman. The Court noted the Embassy was pursuing the claim but directed the Second Respondent to expedite orders.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Second Respondent to take steps to expedite orders on the claim lodged by the petitioner.

Muthamma Vs Union of India — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

MONDAY, THE 24TH OCTOBER 2011 / 2ND KARTHIKA 1933

¶5

WP(C).No. 1398 of 2011(Y)

¶6

-------------------------------------

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

------------------------

¶9

MUTHAMMA, AGED 33 YEARS, W/O.LATE RAJU AMBROS JOOSA MARIAN, SHEEJA HOUSE, ADIMALATHURA, CHOWARA.P.O., TRIVANDRUM, KERALA, INDIA-695 501.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.SHOBY K.FRANCIS

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

----------------------------

¶13

1. UNION OF INDIA, REP.BY SECRETARY TO GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, TYAGARAJ MARG-9, NEW DELHI.PIN-110 009

¶14

2. SECOND SECRETARY, EMBASSY OF INDIA, POST BOX NO.1727, RUWY, POSTAL CODE-112, MUSCAT, SULTANATE OF OMAN.

¶15

3. SECRETARY TO GOVT. OF KERALA, NON-RESIDENT KERALITES-AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT(NORKA), TRIVANDRUM. PIN-695 001.

¶16

4. SALEEM BIN MAYUF NASAR AL-BATHERI TRADING STORES, POST BOX NO.19196, SHARBATAT-SALALAH, SULTANATE OF OMAN.

¶17

R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.S.G OF INDIA R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

sts

¶20

WP(C)NO.1398/2011

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶23

P1 COPY OF THE MALAYALAM DAILY DATED 21/4/2010.

¶24

P2 COPY OF THE MALAYALAM DAILY REPORTED IN GULF EDITION DATED NIL.

¶25

P3 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25/4/10 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶26

P4 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE SULTANATE OF OMAN DATED 29/4/10.

¶27

P5 COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH, SULTANATE OF OMAN.

¶28

P6 COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 20/4/10 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT FORWARDED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶29

P7 COPY OF THE REQUEST DATE 30/11/10 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE HON'BLE UNION CABINET MINISTER FOR EXTERNAL AFFAIRS.

¶30

P8 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26/11/10 SUBMITTED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER BY REGISTERED POST.

¶31

P9 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26/11/10 SUBMITTED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER BY REGISTERED POST.

¶32

P10 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26/11/10 SUBMITTED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER BY REGISTERED POST.

¶33

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO.JUDGE

sts

ANTONY DOMINIC, J

¶39

....................................................... W.P.(C).1398/2011

¶40

Dated this the 24^th day of October, 2011

¶41

JUDGMENT

¶42

Petitioner is the wife of late Raju Ambros Joosa Marian, holder of Indian passport bearing No.H-0917347. While he was working under the sponsorship of the fourth respondent, Raju expired on 19.4.2010. Petitioner made representations to respondents 1 to 3 claiming compensation and other benefits from the fourth respondent Insurance Company. However, compensation was not paid. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition has been filed with the following prayer.

¶43

Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to consider Ext.P7 to 10 representations submitted by the petitioner and direct them to take urgent action and steps, invoking the powers of Govt. of India, to realize the said amounts and all monetary benefits due from the Sultanate of Oman / Muscat and its departments and also from the Sponsor and its Insurance Co. and forward the same to the petitioner within a time limit.

¶44

When the case was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel

¶45

for the petitioner has made available a copy of the letter dated 15.6.2011 received from Bramha Kumar, Second Secretary (E&C)/ PIO of the Embassy of India, Muscat, which reads thus:-

¶46

W.P.(C).1398/11

¶47

¶48

“The issue of providing death compensation by the Government of Oman and obtaining postmortem report and police verification report is being pursued with the local authorities. The latest communication in this regard was sent to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Oman on 3^rd May, 2011. Further the Embassy has authorized its empanelled lawyer M/s Al Khaleej Legal Consultants (Rajab Al Khatri & Associates) to follow up the case with the Salalah Public Prosecution, Sultanate of Oman. The response from the Omani authorities is still awaited.”

¶49

From this letter, it is evident that the second respondent is seized of the claim of the petitioner and that the second respondent has taken necessary steps for getting the compensation due to the petitioner realized.

¶50

Therefore, I direct that on the production of a copy of this judgment, the second respondent will take such steps as are necessary for expediting orders on the claim lodged on behalf of the petitioner.

¶51

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶52

ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge

¶53

mrcs

Muthamma v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muthamma v. Union of India

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

The Ambalathumbhagom Service Co-Op. Bank Vs G. Thomas and Others

Mangalassery Gangadharan Vs Taluk Land Board, Mananthawady

Hazeena Adakudy and Others Vs Union of India and Others

Poyya Grama Panchayat Vs Vinoy T.S

U.a.Rafeeque Vs Additional District Magistrate

Kerala Tribal Development Society Vs State of Kerala and Others