Dismissed

K.M. Rafeeque v. the Secretary

Kerala HC16 Nov 2021WP(C)/3858/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged the Tribunal's refusal to entertain a compensation claim for an inland vessel accident due to lack of notification. The Court noted a new Government Order empowering MACTs to function as Inland Vessel Accidents Claims Tribunals and directed the Tribunal to proceed with the claim.

What did the court decide?

The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam is directed to proceed with OP(MV) No.2126 of 2016 in accordance with law in light of the Government Order dated 4.2.2021.

K.M. Rafeeque Vs the Secretary — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 25TH KARTHIKA,

¶3

1943

¶4

WP(C) NO. 3858 OF 2018

¶5

PETITIONER/S:

¶6

1 K.M. RAFEEQUE AGED 45 YEARS AGED 45 YEARS, S/O. MAJEED, HOUSE NO.3/67, NELLUKADAVU,ROAD, FORTCOCHIN, COCHIN -1.

¶7

2 ASHRAF

¶8

AGED 46 YEARS

¶9

AGED 46 YEARS, S/O. HAMSA, HOUSE NO.2/614,
KUNNUMPURAM,FORTCOCHIN, COCHIN -1.

¶10

3ASHKAR M.A
AGED 36 YEARS
AGED 36 YEARS, S/O. ABDUL GAFOOR, HOUSE
NO.2/187, CALVATTY ROAD, FORTCOCHIN, COCHIN -1.

¶11

BY ADVS.

¶12

SRI.RAHUL SASI
SMT.NEETHU PREM

¶13

RESPONDENT/S:

¶14

1THE SECRETARY
THE DEPARTMENT OF COSTAL SHIPPING AND INLAND
NAVIGATION,1ST FLOOR, NORTH BLOCK, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶15

2 THE DIRECTOR KERALA STATE WATER TRANSPORT AUTHORITY DEPARTMENT, NEAR K.S.R.T.C BUS STATION, ALAPPUZHA - 688 011.

¶16

3 THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ERNAKULAM - 682 011.

¶17

-2-

¶18

W.P.(C). No. 3858 of 2018

¶19

4 THE SECRETARY COCHIN MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PARK AVENUE ROAD, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN - 682 011.

¶20

BY ADVS.
GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SRI.D.G.VIPIN

¶21

OTHER PRESENT:

¶22

SRI.S.KANNAN, SR.GP

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 16.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

-3-

¶25

W.P.(C). No. 3858 of 2018

¶26

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

¶27

W.P.(C) No.3858 of 2018

¶28

Dated this the 16^th day of November, 2021

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers:

¶31

“A) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction, directing the 1^st respondent to take immediate steps to constitute one or more Inland Vessels Accidents Claim’s Tribunal at Ernakulam for the purpose of adjudicating up on claims for compensation in respect of accidents involving the death of, or bodily injury to, persons arising out of mechanically propelled vessels, or damanges to any property of a third party so arising, or both as per Section 54C(f) of Inland Vessels Act, 1917 r/w S.165 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1989.

¶32

B) Issue such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper to grant in the circumstances of case.”

¶33

The petitioners 1 to 3 preferred an original petition

¶34

-4-

¶35

W.P.(C). No. 3858 of 2018

¶36

before the 3^rd respondent Tribunal under Chapter IV A, Section

¶37

54C of the Inland Vessels Act 1917 read with Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for compensation for the injuries sustained in a boat accident that took place on 26.08.2015 at Kochi Kayal, near Fort Kochi Jetty while they were travelling in a passenger ferry plying from Vypin to Fort Kochi. The 3^rd respondent Tribunal declined to entertain the original petition in the absence of a specific notification from the State Government empowering the 3^rd respondent Tribunal to adjudicate claims for compensation in respect of accidents involving the death of, or bodily injury to, persons arising out of mechanically propelled vessels. The Tribunal directed to produce this notification. Ext.P1 is the order. Hence, this writ petition is filed.

¶38

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the

¶39

learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶40

When this writ petition came up for consideration,

¶41

-5-

¶42

W.P.(C). No. 3858 of 2018

¶43

this Court passed an interim order directing the 3^rd respondent to keep in abeyance all further proceedings in the claim petition. The interim order is in force till now.

¶44

Today, the learned Government Pleader handed over a Government Order G.O.(MS)No.30/2021/Home dated 4.2.2021, by which it is notified that all Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals constituted under sub-section (1) of Section 165 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 in the State of Kerala as Inland Vessel Accidents Claims Tribunals, for the purposes and functions under the inland Vessels Act, 1917 with jurisdiction over their respective territorial area with effect from the date coming into force of Section 54(C) of the Inland Vessels Act, 1917, i.e., 21.02.2008. It will be better to extract the above Government Order here:

¶45

GOVERNMENT OF KERALA

¶46

Home (C) Department NOTIFICATION

¶47

G.O.(Ms.) No.30/2021/Home

¶48

Dated, Thiruvananthapuram, 4 th February, 2021 22nd Makara, 1196

¶49

W.P.(C). No. 3858 of 2018

¶50

15th Magha, 1942.

¶51

-6-

¶52

S.R.O.No.132/2021

¶53

In exercise of the powers conferred by subsection (f) of section 54C of the Inland Vessels Act, 1917 (Act 1 of 1917) read with sub-section (1) of section 165 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (Central Act 59 of 1988), the Government of Kerala, hereby notify all the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals constituted under sub-section (1) of section 165 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 in the State of Kerala as Inland Vessel Accidents Claims Tribunals, for the purposes and functions under the Inland Vessels Act, 1917 with jurisdiction over their respective territorial area with effect from the date of coming into force of Section 54(C) of the Inland Vessels Act, 1917, i.e., 21^st February, 2008.

¶54

By order of the Governor T.K.JOSE Additional Chief Secretary to Government”

¶55

In the light of the above notification, I think the Tribunal can proceed with the claim petition.

¶56

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of in the following manner:

¶57

-7-

¶58

W.P.(C). No. 3858 of 2018

¶59

The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam is directed to proceed with OP(MV) No.2126 of 2016 in accordance to law, in the light of G.O.(MS) 30/2021/Home dated 4.2.2021.

¶60

Since it is a claim petition filed in 2016, the MACT will take every endeavour to dispose of the same, as expeditiously as possible.

¶61

sd/-

¶62

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

¶63

das

¶64

-8-

¶65

W.P.(C). No. 3858 of 2018

¶66

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3858/2018

¶67

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶68

EXHIBIT P1THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 03.10.2018 IN
O.P(MV) NO.2124 OF 2016.
EXHIBIT P2THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER GIVEN BY
THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, HIGH
COURT OF KERALA.

K.M. Rafeeque v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.M. Rafeeque v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Sreejith, Vs the Union of India

All Kerala Homeopathic Association Vs the Union of India

P.Ebrahim Vs the Union of India

Ramky Infrastructure Ltd. Vs the State of Kerala

M/S Eminent Security Vs Govt.of India & Another

K.Padmanabhan Vs District Collector, Kozhikode & Others