IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16311 of 2025 ==========================================================

HASINABEN KADARBHAI @ KALUBHAI MULTAN Versus BARODA GUJARAT GRAMIN BANK & ANR.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR SHUBHAM JHAJHARIA(10231) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 04/12/2025

ORAL ORDER

Draft amendment is allowed.

1. By way of the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks the following relief(s):–

“Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus, or a writ in the nature of mandamus, or a writ of certiorari, or a writ in the nature of certiorari, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and setting aside the impugned judgment and order dated 25.06.2025 passed by the Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Arvalli at Modasa in CMA No. 259 of 2025; and further be pleased to direct the release of the amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) standing in FDR No. 0088867 (with Respondent No.1) in MACP No. 154 of 2023 in favour of the present Petitioner.”

2. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that she had filed MACP No. 154 of 2023 before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Modasa, arising out of a road accident resulting in the death of her husband. On 06.07.2024, the matter was settled before the Lok Adalat, and an award at Exhibit 21 for an amount of Rs. 11,00,000/- was passed as per the terms of the compromise. As per the said award, 70% of the compensation amount was allocated to the petitioner and 15% each to claimant Nos. 2 and 3. Thereafter, on 14.08.2024, the petitioner filed CMA No. 252 of 2024 seeking withdrawal of the awarded amount. The learned Tribunal allowed the application and directed that 50% of the share of each claimant be invested in a fixed deposit for a period of five years, and the remaining 50% be released through cheque/RTGS. Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner received a sum of Rs. 7,70,000/-, out of which Rs. 3,85,000/- was released in cash and the balance amount was invested in a fixed deposit. Subsequently, on 18.06.2025, the petitioner filed CMA No. 259 of 2025 seeking withdrawal of Rs. 2,00,000/- from her fixed deposit, stating that she did not own a house and had entered into an agreement to purchase a residential property situated at Sadaqat Park from one Yasmin Mohammad Dadialiyawala for a consideration of Rs. 6,25,000/-. In connection with the said transaction, the petitioner had already paid Rs. 2,00,000/-, borrowed from her relatives, and had further paid Rs. 4,25,000/- by way of instalments. For making the remaining payment, she sought withdrawal of the amount lying in the fixed deposit with the Tribunal; however, her application came to be dismissed.

4. Upon perusal of the record and the sale agreement dated 16.06.2025 produced by the petitioner, it appears that the petitioner is required to pay an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/-. The petitioner is a major, aged 58 years, and has no other financial liabilities.

5. Considering the fact that the petitioner is in need of the amount for the purpose of purchasing a residential house, as she presently does not have her own accommodation, and in view of the principles laid down in A. V. Padma & Ors. v. R. Venugopal & Ors., (2012) 3 SCC 378, as well as the guidelines issued in General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, Trivandrum v. Susamma Thomas & Ors. (1994) 2 SCC 176, this Court is of the opinion that the present petition deserves consideration.

6. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 25.06.2025 passed by the Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Arvalli at Modasa in CMA No. 259 of 2025 is quashed and set aside. It is directed that an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- o