High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Smt. Tripta v. M.A.C.T. And Others - WRIT - C No. 10541 of 2007  RD-AH 3449 (28 February 2007)
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.10541 of 2007
Smt. Tripta .... Petitioner
Motor Accident Claim Tribunal & others ..... Respondents
Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan,J
Heard counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel. No notice is being issued to respondents No. 3 to 6 since the interest of the petitioner is not adverse to those respondents No. 3 to 6 since they being also the claimant along with the petitioner, liberty is however given to them to make an application if they feel aggrieved.
By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the orders date 9.9.2003 and 1.4.2004 passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal. The petitioner was awarded compensation by order of the Additional District Judge dated 6.2.2003 in a Motor Accident Claim Case being case No. 38 of 1998.
The petitioner's case is that the claimants applicant was entitled for the amount, the Tribunal itself noted that applicant claimants have become major on the date when award was passed. However, the District Judge directed the fixed deposit be made of amount of Rs. 239961/- in favour of the petitioner in a nationalised Bank. Subsequently the District Judge, Motor Accident Claim Tribunal passed an order on 1.4.2004 directing release of Rs.1,00,000/- amount in favour of the petitioner. The Learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgement of this Court reported in 2005(2) T.A.C 312 (All.) Yogendra Singh versus Motor Accident Claim Tribunal and submits that petitioner being major was entitled to encash the fixed deposit receipts and the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal committed error in releasing the amount of only Rs. 1,00,000/-.
I have considered the submission of the counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner has become major as is clear from the award of the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal. By the order dated 1.4.2004 of the District Judge the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was released and for balance it was ordered that it should be paid three years after her marriage. From the order of the District Judge it appears that the marriage took place prior to 1.4.2004 and three years period has already elapsed.
In view of the above as per order of the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal dated 1.4.2004 petitioner is entitled for release of the balance amount. Thus the petitioner has made out a case for issuing direction to release the amount deposited under the fixed receipt in her name.
The writ petition is disposed of with the direction that petitioner shall make an application before the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, respondent No. 1 for release of the amount which may be considered and disposed of by the Tribunal within a period of one month from the date of filing such application.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.