Dismissed

Joy Jacquline, v. The Branch Manager

Madras HC20 Sept 2022CRP(MD)/1454/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court held the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal could not reform a 2000 award to change a minor's name despite a subsequent 2003 Gazette notification. The revision petition was dismissed, directing bank authorities to accept the Gazette document for fund disbursement.

What did the court decide?

The Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. The second petitioner is directed to establish her name via Gazette Notification before bank authorities to withdraw the amount.

Joy Jacquline, Vs The Branch Manager — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

CRP(PD)(MD)No.1454 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 20.09.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

¶6

CRP(PD)(MD)No.1454 of 2022

¶7

Joy Jacquline

¶8

Minor Sibilla Beety (Minor is represented by her mother Joy Jacquline 1^st petitioner)

¶9

... Petitioners

¶10

versus

¶11

The Branch Manager, Oriental Company Ltd., Malikmahal, Head Post Office Junction, Nagercoil, Vadasery Village, Agasteeswaram Taluk, Kanniyakumari District. ... Respondent

¶12

Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution

¶13

of India, seeking a direction to the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Principal Sub Judge), Nagercoil, to number the unnumbered

¶14

1/6

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

CRP(PD)(MD)No.1454 of 2022

¶17

I.A.SR.No.778 of 2022 in M.C.O.P.No.26 of 2000, which was returned on 22.03.2022, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal

¶18

(Principal Sub Judge), Nagercoil, dated 22.12.2000.

¶19

For Petitioners : Mr.T.Selvakumaran

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the docket order dated 22.03.2022, returning the unnumbered interlocutory application filed in I.A.SR.No.778 of 2022 in M.C.O.P.No.26 of 2000.

¶22

The petitioners herein are claimants in M.C.O.P.No.26 of 2020. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Principal Sub Judge), Nagercoil, passed an award in M.C.O.P.No.26 of 2000, on 22.12.2000, apportioning some compensation amount for the second petitioner, namely, minor Sibbilla Betty also. Thereafter, the name of the second petitioner “Sibbilla Betty” has been changed as “Sibylla Acsha” in the year 2003, which has also been notified by way of a Gazette 2/6

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

CRP(PD)(MD)No.1454 of 2022

¶25

Notification dated 12.09.2003. In view of the same, the name of the second respondent in Bank Account and other Accounts have also been changed as “Sibylla Acsha”. If the cheque is issued in the name of Sibbilla Betty, then, it will be difficult for her to withdraw the compensation amount. Therefore, the said interlocutory application has been filed under Section 152 C.P.C. before the Tribunal, namely, Principal Sub Court, Nagercoil, to change the name of the second petitioner as “Sibylla Acsha” instead of “Sibbilla Betty” in the decree dated 22.12.2000. However, the same was returned on 22.03.2022, stating that in the petition, the second petitioner's name was mentioned as “Sibylla Betty” and as per the petition, the name of the second petitioner has been mentioned as “Sibylla Betty” and therefore, there was no mistake in the decree. Aggrieved over the same, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed.

¶26

The petitioners filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Principal Sub Judge), Nagercoil, in the year 3/6

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

CRP(PD)(MD)No.1454 of 2022

¶29

1999, which was numbered as M.C.O.P.No.26 of 2000. The Tribunal passed an award on 22.12.2000. Thereafter, the name of the second respondent has been changed as “Sibylla Acsha”, which was also duly published in the Government Gazette on 12.09.2003. Now, the second respondent has become major and for withdrawal of the compensation amount in the name of Sibylla Acsha, the present petition is filed. The Tribunal, after passing the decree in the year 2000, cannot correct the decree by incorporating the name of the second respondent as “Sibylla Acsha” instead of “Sibbilla Beety”, based on the subsequent development of Gazette Notification in the year 2003. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order dated 22.03.2022.

¶30

Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed.

¶31

However, it is always open to the second petitioner to establish her name as “Sibylla Acsha” instead of “Sibbilla Beety” by producing the Government Gazette Notification, which has also been duly published on 12.09.2003, before the concerned Bank authorities. The Bank

¶32

4/6

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

CRP(PD)(MD)No.1454 of 2022

¶35

authorities shall consider the Government Gazette Notification and other identity of Sibbilla Beety and disburse the amount to the second petitioner. No costs.

¶36

20.09.2022

¶37

ogy Index : Yes / No. Internet: Yes / No. To The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Principal Sub Judge), Nagercoil.

¶38

5/6

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶40

CRP(PD)(MD)No.1454 of 2022

¶41

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

¶42

ogy

¶43

CRP(PD)(MD)No.1454 of 2022

¶44

20.09.2022

¶45

6/6

¶46

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Joy Jacquline, v. The Branch Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Joy Jacquline, v. The Branch Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Meena.S Vs Sundar Raj

M. Sabarimala, Vs R. Veeraraghavan

Sundarraj Vs S. Meena

Poonkodi Vs a.Mariyajoseph

B. Raja Krishnan, Vs M. Radhakrishnan

Govindakudi Appakudi Iyer Trust Vs V.S. Kulandaivel