IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
OP.No. 18109 of 1999(E)
1. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD
... Petitioner
Vs
1. UNION OF INDIA
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON (SR.)
For Respondent :SMT.LALY VINCENT, ADDL.CGSC
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :19/03/2009
O R D E R
S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
==================
O.P.No. 18109 of 1999
==================
Dated this the 19th day of March, 2009
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is an insurance company. They are aggrieved by
Ext.P2 order, whereby the District Collector, Ernakulam, pursuant to a
direction in judgment in O.P.No.20080/1998, held that the petitioner is
liable to indemnify the Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd.
(FACT), in respect of the claim raised by respondents 5 to 24, to whom
the FACT was liable to be compensated.
2. The primary contention of the petitioner is that before
passing Ext.P2 order, the petitioner was not given an opportunity of
being heard. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that
the Divisional Manager of the petitioner company was present on the
date when the District Collector posted it for hearing, but he could not
produce any evidence to prove that contention with any material,
which is available in the files of the District Collector. The District
Collector has not chosen to file any counter affidavit, nor are his files
available. Ext.P2 order does not, on the face of it, disclose that the
petitioner had been heard. In fact in an identical case in O.P.No.
14367/1996, a Division Bench of this Court had directed the District
Collector to reajudicate the matter by taking into account the materials
already on record and those which the parties may produce, if any, in
O.P.18109/99 2
support of the respective stands of the parties. In the facts and
circumstances of the case, I am also inclined to adopt that course of
action. Accordingly, this original petition is disposed of with the
following directions:
Ext.P2 order is quashed. The District Collector shall give a fresh
hearing to the petitioner, the FACT, and respondents 5 to 24 or the
legal heirs of those who are no more among respondents 5 to 24.
Representative of the petitioners, FACT and respondents 5 to 24 or
their legal representatives who are on record here, would appear
before the District Collector’s office on 27.4.2009, on which date the
District Collector shall give a convenient date for hearing to the parties
and hear the parties. In any case, orders shall be passed on or before
31.5.2009. If any of the respondents is no more, it would be open to
the legal heirs to get themselves impleaded by filing appropriate
petitions before the District Collector.
Sd/-
sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
///True copy///
P.A. to Judge