Allowed

Sangeeta v. Mact Hisar

Punjab & Haryana HC24 May 2012CR/2720/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Punjab and Haryana High Court allowed the petitioner's civil revision, setting aside the MACT's order rejecting her request to withdraw a fixed deposit. Citing the lack of a breadwinner and economic hardship, the court held that the remaining compensation amount should be released on premature encashment.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order is set aside and the petitioner's application for release of the FDR amount is allowed on premature encashment.

Sangeeta Vs Mact Hisar — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

Civil Revision No. 2720 of 2012

¶2

(1)

¶3

IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Civil Revision No. 2720 of 2012 (O&M)

¶5

Date of decision : 24.5.2012

Sangeeta

..... Petitioner

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hisar

¶10

..... Respondent

¶11

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal

¶12

Present: Mr. Rajesh Khandelwal, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶13

Rajesh Bindal J.

¶14

Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 7.4.2012 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hisar, whereby the prayer of the petitioner for releasing the amount lying deposited in her name in bank, has been dismissed.

¶15

For the view I am taking in the present petition, I do not deem it appropriate to issue notice to the respondent, as the relief in the present petition is not claimed against it.

¶16

Briefly, the facts are that husband of the petitioner died in an accident. The petitioner was awarded compensation of 3,00,000/-. Out of the aforesaid amount, 50,000/- was directed to be paid in cash and the remaining was directed to be deposited in the FDR, which is now sought to be encashed.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had lost her husband and there is no bread earner in the family, as there is no other male member in her family. She has no source of income to maintain herself and her two minor children. The husband used to run a karyana shop. She wants to restart the same karyana and general store to maintain herself and her minor children. The prayer is for release of amount lying in the FDR. He further submitted that the amount awarded to the major/ adult cannot be ordered to be kept in a fixed deposit. He has referred

¶18

Civil Revision No. 2720 of 2012

¶19

(2)

¶20

to a decision of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in H. S. Ahammed Hussain vs Irfan Ahammed 2002 (3) RCR (Civil) 563 and a decision of this court in Asraf vs Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gurgaon 2007 (4) RCR (Civil) 301 in this regard.

¶21

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I find merit in the submissions made. The petitioner is widow of the deceased, who died in the accident. There is no bread earner in the family.

¶22

Considering the above facts and the judgments referred to above, in my opinion, the balance amount lying deposited in the FDR in the name of the petitioner deserves to be released.

¶23

For the reasons stated above, the impugned order is set aside and the application of the petitioner for release of amount kept in FDR is allowed. The bank is directed to release the amount to the petitioner on premature encashment of the FDR, if approached.

¶24

The revision petition is disposed of in the manner indicated above.

¶25

24.5.2012 vs.

¶26

(Rajesh Bindal) Judge

Sangeeta v. Mact Hisar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sangeeta v. Mact Hisar

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

Kuldeep Singh Vs Guraditta Singh and Ors.

Sudesh Rani Vs Subhash Chand Narang

Phool Singh Vs Manga and Ors.

Chander Mohan Nanda Vs Nikhil Lr of Kanta Nanda & Ors.

Rupinder Kaur Vs Kuldeep Kumar

Surinderpal Singh Vs State Bank of Patiala