Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT. TRIPTA versus M.A.C.T. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Smt. Tripta v. M.A.C.T. And Others - WRIT - C No. 10541 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 3449 (28 February 2007)

 

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.21

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.10541 of 2007

Smt. Tripta .... Petitioner

versus

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.

Date 28.2.2007

IB


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

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.