High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Madhav Singh v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 8279 of 2006  RD-AH 3690 (16 February 2006)
Court no. 31
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 8279 of 2006
Madhav Singh vs. The State of U.P. & ors.
Hon'ble Bharati Sapru, J.
The petitioner has filed present writ petition against an order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, which has awarded a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs to the petitioner as compensation of his father death but has withheld the amount for a period of three years and directed that the amount be invested in a Fixed Deposit scheme. The petitioner has moved an application to the Tribunal that he is now attained majority and the money be released to him to enable him to set up his own business. That application has been rejected by the order dated 19.1.2006, which has been impugned in the present writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has no jurisdiction to withhold the amount of an adult, once an award has been passed in his favour. For this purpose, he has relied on a decision of this Court rendered in the case of Smt. Runna vs. V A.D.J. and ors., as reported in 1998 (1) T.A.C. 450 (All) wherein this Court has held that a direction to deposit compensation money in nationalized bank for a long time is not sustainable when the claimant is major.
There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the petitioner has not attained majority. The impugned order itself records the age of the petitioner as 18 years.
Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the above decision of this Court, I am of the opinion that the impugned order dated 19.1.2006 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal suffers from infirmity and deserves to be quashed. It is directed that money lying with the Claims Tribunal be released to the petitioner immediately upon production of a certified copy of this order before the Tribunal.
The writ petition is allowed as above. The impugned order dated 19.1.2006 is set aside. There will be no order as to costs.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.