High Court Kerala High Court

Syamala vs Kerala State Road Transport on 9 July, 2010

Kerala High Court
Syamala vs Kerala State Road Transport on 9 July, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 21308 of 2010(K)


1. SYAMALA, D/O.SANTHA, AGED 42 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.B.SARASAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :09/07/2010

 O R D E R
                     P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J
           ----------------------------------------
             W.P(C)21331/2010,
                    Nos.21308/2010, 21309/2010, 21330/2010
                                21332/2010 & 21333/2010
            ------------------------------------------
                   Dated this the 9th day of July, 2010.

                            J U D G M E N T

The issue involved in all these cases is rather similar and

hence is being dealt with together.

2. The petitioners are either injured or the legal heirs of the

deceased, who sustained serious injuries in some road traffic

accidents, which led to different claim petitions before the

concerned Tribunals. On conclusion of the trial, the Tribunals have

passed Awards granting compensation with interest as specified.

Inspite of filing Execution Petitions and resorting to such other

steps, the liability remains still to be satisfied, which made the

petitioners to approach this Court by filing these Writ Petitions.

3. The learned standing counsel appearing for the

Corporation submits that, the default is never wilful; but because of

some unforeseen pecuniary circumstances and that the entire

liability will be cleared within ‘three’ months. Taking note of the

said submission, this Court does not find it necessary to adjudicate

the matter further and accordingly, all these matters are closed

W.P(C) Nos.21308/2010, 21309/2010, 21330/2010
21331/2010, 21332/2010 & 21333/2010 2

directing the respondents to effect the payments as assured and

undertaken before this Court, satisfying the liability within three

months as above.

4. However, before parting with the matters, this Court

would like to express serious concern with regard to the plight of

the persons like the petitioners herein. It is revealed that,

eventhough the compensation was awarded by the Tribunals years

back, the Corporation has not disbursed the amounts so far; nor

have they filed any appeal in this regard. The stand being reflected

is that, the Corporation chooses to honour the Awards only after

filing Writ Petitions and in some cases, after filing Contempt of

Court Case. This practice cannot but be deprecated in the

strongest possible words; for the plain reason that it only helps to

increase the number of litigations before this Court, besides causing

much loss and hardships to the claimants. Being a State Government

undertaking, the respondent Corporation has also got a duty to

ensure that the litigations before this Court are caused to be scaled

down to the maximum possible extent, unless there is any valid

defence. In view of the undisputed fact that the Awards passed by

W.P(C) Nos.21308/2010, 21309/2010, 21330/2010
21331/2010, 21332/2010 & 21333/2010 3

the various Tribunals have not been chosen to be challenged by

filing appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the non-

payment of the due amount in similar cases atleast in a phased

manner, is not liable to be justified; which requires to be

considered, for providing appropriate remedial measures; lest the

default in this regard should invite adverse consequences including

ordering ‘Cost’. More so, since the time factor very much pricks the

conscience, as in W.P(C) No.21308 of 2010, where the accident

giving rise to the cause of action was on 26.2.1994 and the Award

was passed by the Tribunal on 20.12.1999. It has also to be

considered why the vehicles are not duly insured, to meet the

requirement under Chapter X and Chapter XI of the Motor Vehicles

Act 1988 and whether the KSRTC enjoys/continue any benefit of

exemption under Section 146(3) (C) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

6. However, for the time being, this Court takes a lenient

view and refrains from awarding any cost in respect of the delay and

the expenses stated as incurred by the petitioners in filing Execution

Petitions and the Writ Petitions.

7. Registry shall forward a copy of this judgment to

W.P(C) Nos.21308/2010, 21309/2010, 21330/2010
21331/2010, 21332/2010 & 21333/2010 4

Principal Secretary to the Government of Kerala, Department of

Transports, for appropriate steps, if any.

The Writ Petitions are disposed of.

Sd/-

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
JUDGE

//True Copy//

P.A to Judge

ab