Partly allowed

K.M.Jamal Haji v. the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal&Anr.

Kerala HC17 Sept 2015WP(C)/14631/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging execution warrants, the petitioner, an elderly jeep owner, claimed inability to pay compensation awarded to accident victims, citing lack of assets and insolvency. The court allowed installment payments.

What did the court decide?

Execution warrants suspended for six months; petitioner permitted to pay award amount in six monthly installments starting October 15, 2015.

K.M.Jamal Haji Vs the Motor Accidents Claims… — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/26TH BHADRA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 14631 of 2007 (P)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

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

¶8

K.M.JAMAL HAJI, S/O.AHAMMED KUTTY, KOORIMANNIL MELEMANNIL HOUSE, KADAMBODE, PANTHALLOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR

¶10

RESPONDENTS :

¶11

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

¶12

1. THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MANJERI.

¶13

2. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.,

¶14

DIVISIONAL OFFICE, MANJERI, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER.

¶15

R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.K. ABDUL RAHMAN R2 BY ADV. SRI.A.R.GEORGE

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

¶18

WP(C).No. 14631 of 2007 (P)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

¶21

P1: COPY OF THE COMMON AWARD OF THE MACT MANJERI DT 14/3/2001 IN OPMV NO. 2162/1996 AND CONNECTED CASES.

¶22

P2: COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION FILED BY THE R2 AGAINST THE PETITIONER AS E.P. NO. 84/2002 IN OP(MV) NO. 2286/95 BEFORE THE MACT, MANJERI DT 7/8/2002.

¶23

P3: COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION FILED BY THE R2 AGAINST THE PETITIONER AS E.P. NO. 85/2002 IN OP(MV) NO. 1300/96BEFRE THE MACT MANJERI DT 7/8/2002.

¶24

P4: COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION FILED BY THE R2 AGAINST THE PETITIONER AS E.P. NO. 86/2002 IN OP(MV) NO. 2285/95 BEFORE THE MACT, MANJERI DT 7/8/2002.

¶25

P5: COPY F THE EXECUTION PETITION FILED BY THE R2 AGAINST THE PETITIONER AS E.P. N. 87/2002 IN OPMV NO. 1299/96 BEFOE THE MACT, MANJERI DT 7/8/2002.

¶26

P6: COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION FILED BY THE R2 AGAINST THE PETITIONER AS E.P. NO. 88/2002 IN OPMV NO. 2163/95 BEFORE THE MACT MANJERI DT 7/8/2002.

¶27

P7: COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EP NO. 84/2002 IN OP(MV) NO. 2286/2995 BEFORE THE MACT, MANJERI DT 4/12/2002.

¶28

P8: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE PANTHALLOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. DT 9/7/2003.

¶29

P9: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC 25551/2003 DT 12/12/2006.

¶30

P10: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE MACT MANJERI IN EP NO. 84/2002 IN OP(MV) NO. 2286/1995.

¶31

P11: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE MACT MANJERI IN E.P. NO. 85/2002 IN OP(MV) NO. 1300/1996 DT, 31/7/2003.

¶32

P12: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE MACT MANJERI IN EP NO. 86/2002 IN OP(MV) NO. 2285/1995 DT 31/7/2003.

¶33

P13: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE MACT MAJERI IN EP NO. 87/2002 IN OP (MV) NO. 1299/1996 DT 31/7/2003.

¶34

P14: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE MACT MANJERI IN EP NO. 88/2002 IN OPMV NO. 2163/1995 DT, 31/7/2003.

¶35

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE

ANU SIVARAMAN, J.

¶40

= = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.14631 of 2007

¶41

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 17^th day of September, 2015

¶42

JUDGMENT

¶43

The petitioner is the owner of a jeep bearing registration No.KLM-7243 which was involved in a motor accident on 07.01.1995. It is submitted that the jeep owned by the petitioner dashed against another jeep and 10 persons were injured in the accident. By Ext.P1 a common award was passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Manjeri on 14.03.2001. The petitioner was found liable to repay the amount covered by five of the smallest amounts awarded as compensation in the O.P. (MV)s In pursuance to Ext.P1, the insurer satisfied the award and initiated recovery proceedings against the petitioner. Exts.P2 to P6 execution petitions were preferred. It is submitted that the petitioner being unable to meet the liability, he had filed counter statements in the execution petitions pleading no means. He states that the only property possessed by him was already mortgaged to the Panthalloor Service Co-operative Bank Ltd and he had no other means to satisfy the award issued by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. However, Exts.P10 to P14 warrants

¶44

¶45

W.P.(C).No.14631 of 2007

¶46

were issued against him which were challenged in this writ petition.

¶47

At the time of admission of the writ petition on 08.05.2007, this Court had granted an interim stay on condition that the petitioner deposits Rs.30,000/- within one month. It is not clear whether the amounts have been deposited by the petitioner as directed. The aggregate amount covered by Exts.P2 to P6, it is submitted, would only come to `46,647/- with interest. It is the case of the petitioner that he had absolutely no means to pay the amount. He also contended that he was 65 years of age at the time of the issuance of Exts.P10 to P14 and would be 74 years old now.

¶48

Heard Sri.Babu S. Nair, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.A.R.George, learned counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent.

¶49

It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent that the petitioner was liable to satisfy five of the lowest awards in terms of Ext.P1. Since the petitioner had neither got the award satisfied nor had taken steps to satisfy the same, the 2^nd respondent filed execution petitions against the

¶50

W.P.(C).No.14631 of 2007

¶51

¶52

petitioner. In the above circumstances, Exts.P10 to P14 are perfectly valid and in accordance with law, it is submitted.

¶53

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is not possessed any means to satisfy the awards and therefore may be given an opportunity to pay off the amounts due to the 2^nd respondent in installments. In view of the age of the petitioner and his plea that he has no means to satisfy the awards, it is directed that the petitioner is permitted to pay the amounts due to the 2^nd respondent in Ext.P1 award in six monthly installments starting from 15^th October 2015. The warrants issued against the petitioner, if they have not been executed, shall not be executed till the expiry of six months. In case the petitioner does not make the remittance as directed above. the warrants shall be revived as against him and the 2^nd respondent shall be at liberty to proceed with the execution proceedings.

¶54

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶55

Anu Sivaraman, Judge

¶56

K.M.Jamal Haji v. the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal&Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.M.Jamal Haji v. the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal&Anr.

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

Rajan Pilai and Ors. Vs Industrial Tribunal,Kollam & Ors.

Symenson Patric Bivera Vs State of Kerala

Mrs.Vijayam Muraleedharan Vs State of Kerala

Sri.K.Rajendran Vs Rehabilitation Plantations Ltd.

G.Radhakrishnan Vs the Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Soci

K.T.Joseph Vs State of Kerala & Others