Case Details

SMT. URMILA DEVI versus MACT/ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE COURT NO.2 AND ANOTHER

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement

Smt. Urmila Devi v. Mact/Additional District Judge Court No.2 And Another - WRIT - C No. 19567 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 7648 (12 April 2006)

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No.38

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 19567 of 2006

Smt. Urmila Devi Vs. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/

Additional District Judge, Court No.2,

Mathura & another

Hon'ble Vineet Saran, J

On the death of one Balveer, son of the petitioner, the petitioner as well as her husband Ajab Singh filed Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 173 of 2003. By an award dated 26.7.2005 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mathura a sum of Rs. 1,80,000/- alongwith 6% interest was awarded in favour of the petitioner and her husband, out of which half and half was to be paid to both the claimants. By the said award, although the share of Ajab Singh was to be paid to him but the share of the petitioner was to be kept in a fixed deposit for the period of three years and paid to her thereafter. The total awarded amount alongwith interest was deposited by the Insurance Company, out of which Rs. 1,02,176/- was paid to Ajab Singh and the share of the petitioner amounting to Rs. 1,02,176/- was kept in fixed deposit. The petitioner thereafter filed an application for withdrawal of the said amount on the ground that she needs money because of the marriage of her daughter. The Tribunal has rejected the said application of the petitioner vide order dated 31.1.2006, which is impugned in this writ petition.

I have heard Sri Sanjeet Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is major and is entitled to the amount awarded in her favour. In the impugned order there is no denial of the fact that the daughter of the petitioner is to get married but it has only been said that it is normally expected that the father of a girl would make adequate arrangement for the marriage of his daughter.

Be that as it may, in the circumstances when the award has been passed in favour of the petitioner and the petitioner requires the money, which belongs to her, there is no justification to keep the same in fixed deposit in her name, which she may be entitled to receive only after three years. For the foregoing reasons, in my view, the petitioner would be entitled to encashment of the fixed deposit made in her favour in pursuance of the award dated 26.7.2005.

Accordingly, this writ petition stands allowed. The order dated 31.1.2006 is quashed and the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court NO. 2, Mathura is directed to release the amount of Rs. 1,02,176/- which is deposited in the Union Bank of India, Mathura under fixed deposit receipt no. 2700464 alongwith upto date interest which may have accrued in favour of the petitioner.

Let a certified copy of this order be issued to the learned counsel for the petitioner on payment of usual charges within two days.

Dt/-12.4.2006

Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Case Details

Case Law Search

Judgement

Copyright

Advertisement