Ratnam vs The Deputy Tahsildar (Rr) on 25 November, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 33906 of 2009(G)


1. RATNAM, AGED 48, W/O.LATE VIJAYAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), TALUK OFFICE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MATTANCHERRY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.RAJKUMAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM

 Dated :25/11/2009

 O R D E R
                      C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J.

                     ------------------------------
                   W.P.(C).No.33906 OF 2009
                     ------------------------------

          Dated this the 25th day of November, 2009


                         J U D G M E N T

———————-

1. Petitioner is aggrieved by revenue recovery steps

initiated pursuant to Ext.P1 and P2 notices, for realisation of

amounts due under an award of the Motor Accidents Claims

Tribunal, Ernakulam. It is evident from Ext.P1 and P2 notices

that the revenue recovery proceedings is initiated pursuant to a

requisition received from the MACT. Therefore the petitioner

could not make any successful challenge against liability for

payment in this writ petition, unless she challenges the award

and get it set aside through appropriate remedies provided

under the statute.

2. According to the petitioner she has not received any

notice from the Tribunal and she was not aware about the award,

till Ext.P1 and P2 notices were received. It is submitted that

steps have already been taken by the petitioner to get a certified

copy of the award and to resort to remedies available under the

statute against such award. Therefore, the limited prayer of the

petitioner is only for a direction to keep in abeyance the coercive

steps of recovery for a short period, in order to facilitate the

W.P.(C).33906/09-G 2

petitioner to approach the statutory authorities.

3. Having considered facts and circumstances, the writ

petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in

abeyance further coercive steps of recovery initiated pursuant to

Ext.P1 and P3 for a period of one month from today in order to

facilitate the petitioner to approach the appropriate statutory

authorities against the award of the MACT.

C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.

Okb