IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 80 of 2026 ==========================================================

MINOR ROSHNIBEN D/O.PUNJAJI THAKOR THROUGH KAILASHBEN PUNJAJI THAKOR Versus UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.

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

Appearance:

NISHIT A BHALODI(9597) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 08/01/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief:

“(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to admit and allow this petition;

(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to pass an appropriate order to quash and set aside the order passed by the Ld. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Mahesana in MACMA No. 637/2025 (Annexure A) dated 11/12/2025 and thereby issuing direction to the learned tribunal/concerned bank to allow the claimant to withdraw 30% amount out of the total amount deposited by the Respondent - Insurance Co.

(C) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to pass such other and further orders may be deemed just and proper looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of the justice;”

2. Heard learned advocate for the petitioner.

3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that in the injury case compensation has been awarded, however, the learned Tribunal has committed an error in dismissing the application being MACMA No. 637 of 2025 for withdrawal of the amount. It was contended that the order passed by the learned Tribunal is unjust. It was further submitted that the petitioner has incurred medical expenses of Rs.1,13,281/- towards treatment of the minor claimant and that the applicant is a housewife and there is no other earning member in the family. It was therefore prayed that withdrawal of the amount be permitted, as investment in FDR is not mandatory in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in A.V. Padma v. R.

Venugopal, (2012) 3 SCC 378

4. Having heard the learned advocate for the petitioner and upon perusal of the record, it appears that the learned Tribunal passed an order dated 12.09.2025 in MACP No. 225 of 2019, whereby an amount of Rs.21,77,005/- deposited by the Insurance Company was ordered to be invested in Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs) till the claimant attains majority, as the claimant is a minor.

5. From the said order, it is evident that the learned Tribunal has already taken into consideration the medical expenses of Rs.1,13,281/-. Considering the age of the minor claimant, who has sustained 51% permanent disability, the amount has been invested for her welfare and future benefit, and the claimants have been permitted to withdraw the accrued interest on the FDRs.

6. This Court is of the considered view that the learned Tribunal has not committed any error in directing investment of the amount in FDR, more particularly in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Muljibhai Ajayrambhai Harijan v. United India Insurance Company Limited, 1982 (1) GLR 756, wherein it was held that when compensation is awarded to a minor, the amount should be invested in a long-term fixed deposit at least till the minor attains the age of majority, and only the interest and necessary expenses incurred by the guardian may be permitted to be withdrawn.

7. In view of the above, it is the duty of the Tribunal, while disbursing compensation, to ensure that the amount is not frittered away and that the interest of the minor claimant is duly protected. This is not a case where the guardian has demonstrated any special capacity to invest or utilize the amount in a manner more beneficial than the secured investment. On the contrary, release of a substantial portion of the amount carries a real risk of dissipation, which would defeat the very purpose for which the compensation has been awarded, namely, the welfare and rehabilitation of the minor.

8. When a specific query was put to the learned advocate for th