Disposed

Saran.C.R v. Rani Chandrasekharan

Kerala HC1 Mar 2023OP (MAC)/47/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition alleging delay in hearing OP (MV) No.687/2012 before MACT, Neyyattinkara. Court noted Tribunal's opinion of disposal within three months after evidence of third respondent is recorded and directed the Tribunal to comply.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Tribunal to dispose of OP (MV) No.687/2012 within three months after recording evidence of the third respondent after affording opportunity to the Insurance Company.

Saran.C.R Vs Rani Chandrasekharan — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
WEDNESDAY, THE 1STDAY OF MARCH 2023 / 10TH PHALGUNA,1944
OP (MAC) NO. 47 OF 2023

¶4

OPMV 687/2012 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,NEYYATTINKARA

¶5

PETITIONER/CLAIMANT:

¶6

SARAN.C.R
AGED 31 YEARS
S/O.R.C.UNNITHAN, SARANYAN, TC 41/1146, TEACHERS LANE,
KOWDIAR P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695003 NOW RESIDING
AT RVCARA 183, KANAMPALLIL, THEVALLY P.O, KOLLAM -, PIN
- 691009
BY ADVS.
PRATHEESH.P
ANJANA KANNATH

¶7

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENT:

¶8

1RANI CHANDRASEKHARAN
AGED 58 YEARS
W/O.R.C UNNITHAN, SARANYAM, TC 4/1146,
TEACHERS LANE, KOWDIAR P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695003.

¶9

2THE MANAGER
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., ST. JOSEPH PRESS BUILDING,
VAZHUTHCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM , PIN - 695014.

¶10

SRI.GEORGE A CHERIAN, SC

¶11

THISOP(MAC)HAVINGCOMEUPFORADMISSIONON
01.03.2023,THECOURTONTHESAMEDAYDELIVEREDTHE
FOLLOWING:

¶12

OP (MAC) NO. 47 OF 2023

¶13

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

The petitioner is a claimant in O.P.(MV) No.687/2012 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Neyyattinkara. The aforesaid claim petition has been preferred claiming compensation for the alleged injuries sustained consequent to a motor accident that took place on 23.02.2011. The prayer in this writ petition is as under;

¶16

i. Issue a direction to the MACT, Neyyattinkara to dispose OP(MV) No.687/2012 in a time bound manner.

¶17

This Court has called for a report from the Tribunal as regards the relative pendency of the claim petition on the files of the said court and also the time frame within which the claim petition can be heard and disposed of. The report submitted by the Tribunal has been placed before this Court by the Registry. The Tribunal has expressed optimism that the recording of the evidence of the 3rd respondent can be completed, and thereafter the claim petition can be disposed of within a period of three months.

¶18

The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submits that it was due to the lapses and latches on the part of the petitioner that the matter was delayed for more than a decade. It is submitted that petitions, one after the other, were filed before this Court,

¶19

OP (MAC) NO. 47 OF 2023

¶20

¶21

and stays were obtained. It is also submitted that he wants an adjournment to place on record a counter affidavit highlighting the stand of the Insurance Company. The learned counsel finally submits that without properly affording an opportunity to the Insurance Company to let in evidence to controvert the contentions of the petitioner, if the petition is disposed of, serious prejudice would be caused.

¶22

I have considered the submissions advanced. I find that the claim petition is pending since 2012. The Tribunal has expressed optimism that the evidence of the 3rd respondent can be completed, and thereafter the claim petition can be disposed of within a period of three months. In that view of the matter, I direct the Tribunal to act in terms of the report dated 27.02.2023 and dispose of the claim petition within the time stated in the report after affording an opportunity to the 3rd respondent to let in evidence and to substantiate their contentions.

¶23

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE

¶26

Dxy

¶27

OP (MAC) NO. 47 OF 2023

¶28

¶29

APPENDIX OF OP (MAC) 47/2023

¶30

PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS

¶31

Exhibit P1THE COPY OF THE CLAIM PETITION FILED BY THE
PETITIONER AS OP(MV) NO.687/2012 DATED
24.4.2011.

¶32

Exhibit P2THE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP(MAC)
NO.43/2021 DATED 2.11.2022.

¶33

Exhibit P3THE COPY OF THE DEPOSITION GIVEN BY THE
DOCTOR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN OP(MV)
NO.678/2012 DATED 9.4.2023.

¶34

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL

Saran.C.R v. Rani Chandrasekharan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saran.C.R v. Rani Chandrasekharan

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

Georgekutty Vs James P.A

Sunil Vs Vidyasagar (Owner)

Femina Siyad Vs the Secretary

M/S. A.P.R.M. Central School Vs 1. the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organization

Aseem. J.S Vs Regional Transport Authority

Sabir M.A. Vs the Secretary