Allowed

Smt. Anusuiya Bai Yadav v. Khuman Sahu

Chhattisgarh HC21 Sept 2022WP227/95/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed by accident claimants aggrieved by Partial Allowance of their application before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal seeking withdrawal of F.D. amount. Court granted liberty to re-apply before the Tribunal with specific documents for disbursement of mother's F.D. amount for house renovation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner No. 1 granted liberty to move fresh application before Tribunal with specific documents; Tribunal directed to consider application afresh and disburse sufficient amount for house renovation

Smt. Anusuiya Bai Yadav Vs Khuman Sahu — Motor Accident Claims | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

Writ Petition (227) No. 95 of 2022

¶5

Smt. Anusuiya Bai Yadav wife of late Bhakta Yadav, aged about 40 years,

¶6

Toran Yadav, aged about 17 years son of late Bhakta Yadav,

¶7

Komal Yadav, aged about 13 years, son of late Bhakta Yadav, Petitioners no. 2 & 3 are minor, represented through mother Smt. Anusuiya Bai

¶8

Salik Ram Yadav, aged about 80 years, son of Firtu Ram Yadav, All are resident of Village- Binauri, Police Station – Fingeshwar, District Gariyaband (C.G.)

¶9

---- Petitioners/Claimants

¶10

Versus

¶11

Khuman Sahu son of Rameshwar Sahu, aged about 28 years, resident of Village-Roba, Police Station- Fingeshwar, District Gariyaband (C.G.) (Driver of Vehicle Motorcycle Pro No. C.G.- 23-F-0357)

¶12

Maniram Sahu son of Lallu Ram Sahu, resident of Village- Ghoghra, Police Station- Fingeshwar, District Gariyaband (C.G.)

¶13

(Owner of Vehicle Motorcycle Pro No. C.G.- 23-F-0357)

¶14

Branch Manager, I.C.I.C.I. Lombard Insurance Company Limited, Commercial Building, Devendra Nagar, Tiraha, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) (Insurer of Vehicle Motorcycle Pro No. C.G.- 23-F-0357)

¶15

---- Respondents

¶16

For Petitioners : Mr. Sangeet Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate For Respondents : None

¶17

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

¶18

21.09.2022

¶19

I.A. No. 01/2022, application for taking documents on record.

¶20

On due consideration, the application (I.A. No. 01/2022), which is duly supported by affidavit of petitioner No.1, is allowed and the documents are taken on record.

¶21

This writ petition has been filed, being aggrieved by the order dated 07.10.2021 passed in Misc. Claim Case No. 34/2021 by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gariyaband (C.G.) whereby application moved by the petitioners/claimants for disbursement of compensation amount deposited in the Nationalized Bank as fixed deposit has been partly allowed.

¶22

All the petitioners are claimants in Claim Case No. 55/2019 and vide award dated 12.12.2020, the learned National E-Lok Adalat, Bench No.01,

¶23

¶24

Gariyaband has directed the Insurance Company/respondent No.3 to pay compensation in tune of Rs.9,75,000/- to the claimants.

¶25

The petitioners moved application before the learned Claims Tribunal stating that their house has got abandoned and they need financial help for renovation of their house and they have no source of income. They further pleaded that in account of petitioner No.1 Smt. Anusuiya Bai Yadav Rs.3,34,000/- and in account of petitioner No.4 Salik Ram Yadav Rs.83,500/are lying in the fixed deposit accounts. The petitioners moved application to withdraw the entire amount and the learned Tribunal vide order dated 07.10.2021 partly allowed the application moved by the petitioners and ordered for disbursement of the amount of Rs.83,500/- only deposited in the name of petitioner No.4/Salik Ram Yadav.

¶26

Taking into consideration the aforesaid circumstances and submission of learned counsel for the petitioners, particularly considering the fact that the petitioners have no source of income and documents showing the conditions of the house of the petitioners in deteriorated condition, petitioner No.1 is granted liberty to move a fresh application before the Tribunal for disbursement of the amount deposited in her account as fixed deposit alongwith relevant documents showing survey number of plot in which house is constructed, photographs of house showing present condition and certificate from Sarpanch in this regard. If such an application alongwith documents is moved by petitioner No.1 before the learned Tribunal, the Tribunal is directed to consider the application afresh and to disburse sufficient amount for renovation or for repairing of the house without being influenced by earlier order.

¶27

With the aforesaid observation, the petition is disposed of at motion stage.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶30

vatti

Smt. Anusuiya Bai Yadav v. Khuman Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Anusuiya Bai Yadav v. Khuman Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradeep Kumar Samal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vinod Kumar Vs Somnath

Dr. (Smt.) Surjit Behl Vs Smt. Ravinder Kaur

Awadhesh Sahu @ Lalu Vs The State Of Chhattisgarh

Awadh Narayan Mishra Vs Prunima Mishra

Amit Manuja Vs Smt. Mahi Manuja