1999 Supreme(Raj) 105
Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench
Honble J.C. VERMA, J.
Nathi - Appellant
Versus
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal & Ors. - Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 688 of 1999
Decided On : February 11, 1999
Resham Bhargava, for Petitioner
Headnote:Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Sec. 140 – Compensation awarded deposited in fixed deposit – Petitioner wanted money for the marriage of her daughters – Tribunal rejected the application – Award not challenged – Petitioner allowed to withdraw the amount fixed deposited along with the interest.
(2). The petitioner was to marry her two daughters namely Lalita and Seema, which was fixed in the month of the February, 1999. Her husband is a Class-lV employee. To utilise the amount towards expenses of marriage of her daughters she applied for releasing the amount of fixed deposit. The Tribunal vide order dated 22.1.1999 (Ann.3) has rejected the request of petitioner for releasing the amount of fixed deposits. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition with the prayer to quash and set aside the order dated 22.1.1999 and to allow the petitioner to withdraw the amount of fixed deposit for making arrangement of the marriage of her daughters.
(3). It is submitted by counsel for petitioner that none of the respondents have filed any appeal and the award has not been challenged in any court.
(4). Reliance is being placed on the judgment in case of Durga Devi vs. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra (1) and Smt. Runna vs. Vth Additional District Judge, Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Gorakhpur (2) wherein it was held that awarding of compensation to major claimants could not be deposited in fixed deposit without their consent.
(5). In the present case, the petitioner was requiring the amount for the marriage of her daughters. It is not understandable as to what she would do with the savings, by way of fixed deposit, when she is forced to beg or borrow money for solemnising the marriage of her daughters.
(6). For the reason that the amount stood already deposited and the award not been challenged, the writ petition can be decided in limine without issuing any notice to other party, as no other party is interested against the petitioner and the writ petition can be allowed.
(7). The writ petition is allowed with the direction to respective Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Ajmer and the Bank where the amount of Award stands deposited that in case the petitioner wants to withdraw the amount of fixed deposits, as discussed above, the same shall be released to her without any further delay, along with the interest which might have been accrued to her.
(8). For the reasons mentioned above, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 22.1.1999 is quashed and set aside.