Allowed

Pehlad Chander Dass v. Vinod Kumar and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC15 Feb 2011CR/1070/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Civil Revision, this court quashed the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal order dismissing the petitioner's application to release Rs.10 lacs from a fixed deposit account. The court held that the funds should be released to meet the petitioner's daughter's wedding expenses, relying on Supreme Court law prohibiting fixation of funds for adults.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 19.1.2011 set aside; directed release of Rs.10,00,000/- to petitioner for daughter's wedding expenditure.

Pehlad Chander Dass Vs Vinod Kumar and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2011) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Revision No.1070/2011 Date of decision:15.2.2011.

¶3

Hawaldar(HAV)Pehlad Chander Dass

¶4

.............Petitioner

¶5

¶6

Vinod Kumar and others

¶7

..............Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

¶9

Present:Mr.Vivek Khatri,Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Jaswant Singh,J(Oral).

¶11

Claimant/petitioner in the present revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution has assailed the order dated 19.1.2011 (P5) passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hisar whereby his application for release of an amount of Rs.10 lacs out of compensation awarded to him has been dismissed.

¶12

For the view I am taking in the present petition, I do not deem it appropriate to issue notice to the respondents as the same would unnecessarily delay the disposal of the present petition and otherwise also no relief has been claimed against the respondents.

¶13

In a motor vehicular accident the claimant/petitioner suffered grievous injuries and remained admitted in the hospital. On account of his disability and expenditure incurred on his medical

¶14

treatment vide award dated 22.11.2010 he was awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.20,04,460/- which was ordered to be deposited in a fixed deposit account for a period of not less than three years.

¶15

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that marriage of the daughter of the claimant/petitioner is fixed for 3.3.2011 and in order to meet that expenditure the petitioner had moved an application for releasing an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- out of the aforesaid FDR account, which prayer has been wrongly declined by the learned Tribunal.

¶16

After hearing the learned counsel for the claimant/petitioner I am of the opinion that the prayer made is liable to be accepted in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in H.S.Ahammed

¶17

Hussain v. Irfan Ahammed , 2002(3) RCR (Civil)563, wherein it has been opined that the amount payable to an adult cannot be directed to be kept in fixed deposit.

¶18

Keeping in view the enunciation of law as referred to above, the impugned order dated 19.1.2011 (P5) passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hisar is set aside and it is directed that a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- be released in favour of the claimant/petitioner to meet out the wedding expenditure of his daughter.

¶19

Disposed of.

¶20

(Jaswant Singh) Judge

¶21

15.2.2011. joshi

Pehlad Chander Dass v. Vinod Kumar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pehlad Chander Dass v. Vinod Kumar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chander Parkash Shukla Vs Kanwal Jit Singh

Balwinder Singh Vs Baljit Kaur

Hoshiari Devi Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Avtar Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ores

Mohinder Singh Vs Tejwinder Singh etc.

Jaswant Singh Vs Gobinder Singh & Ors.