K. SREEDHAR RAO, J.

( 1 ) THE revision petitioner along with his wife, was awarded compensation for the death of their son, in M. V. C. No. 18 of 1998 in a sum of rs. 60,000 which was settled in Lok Adalat. Out of the said compensation amount, a sum of Rs. 20,000 is deposited in Vysya bank for a period of five years in the name of the petitioner, by the order of the court. The balance of Rs. 40,000 is said to have been paid to the petitioner.

( 2 ) THE petitioner made an application for payment of Rs. 20,000 kept in fixed deposit in Vysya Bank to meet the marriage expenses of his daughter, scheduled to be held on 18. 2. 2000. Along with the application, the marriage invitation card is produced before the trial court. The trial court had rejected the request noting that rs. 40,000 is already paid to the petitioner which is available with him and the same could be utilised for the purpose of marriage, besides dwelt upon insignificant and unimportant discrepancies like the age of the petitioner shown as 32 years in the main petition and in the petition filed for withdrawal, it was shown as 43 years; thus suspected the identity of the petitioner. There appears to be an averment made by the petitioner that a sum of Rs. 40,000 is said to be in deposit whereas only Rs. 20,000 was kept in deposit. By highlighting these minor discrepancies, the trial court rejected the petition and held that the amount of rs. 40,000 already paid can be utilised for marriage, placing reliance on the ruling of the Supreme Court in the case of Union carbide Corporation v. Union of India, air 1992 SC 248.

( 3 ) IN para 105 of the said judgment, at page 312, guidelines to be followed by courts while disbursing compensation, have been laid down for useful reference. The same is stated hereunder: (I) The Claims Commissioner should, in the case of minors, invariably order the amount of compensation awarded to minor to be invested in long term fixed deposits at least till the date of minor attaining majority. The expenses incurred by the guardian or next friend may, however, be allowed to be withdrawn; (ii) In the case of illiterate claimants also, the Claims Commissioner should follow the procedure set out in (i) above, but if lump sum payment is required for effecting purchases of any movable or immovable property such as agricultural implements, assets utilisable to earn a living, the Commissioner may consider such a request after making sure that the amount is actually spent for the purpose and the demand is not a ruse to withdraw the money; (iii) In the case of semi-literate persons, the Commissioner should ordinarily resort to the procedure set out in (ii) above unless he is satisfied that the whole or part of the amount is required for expanding any existing business or for purchasing some property for earning a livelihood; (iv) In the case of widows, the commissioner should invariably follow the procedure set out in (i) above; (v) In personal injury cases, if further treatment is necessary, withdrawal of such amounts as may be necessary for incurring the expenses for such treatment may be permitted; (vi) In all cases in which investment in long term fixed deposits is made, it should be on the condition that the bank will not permit any loan or advance on the fixed deposit and interest on the amount invested is paid monthly directly to the claimant or his guardian, as the case may be. It should stipulate that the f. D. R. shall carry a note on the face of the document that no loan or advance will be allowed on the security of the said document without express permission; and (vii) In all cases, liberty to apply for withdrawal in case of an emergency should be available to the claimants. Government might also consider such investments being handled by promulgating an appropriate scheme under the unit Trust of India Act so as to afford to the beneficiaries not only adequate returns but also appropriate capital appreciation to neutralise the effect of denud

Click Here to Read the rest of this document