Allowed

Darshan Kumar v. Sant Ram and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC9 May 2012CR/2774/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a civil revision petition challenging the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's order dismissing the petitioner's application for FDR encashment. The court allowed the revision, directed the bank to release the deposited compensation amount, and ordered the petitioner to file the sale deed.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order is set aside; the FDR amount is directed to be released on premature encashment.

Darshan Kumar Vs Sant Ram and Others — Motor Accident Claims | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

Civil Revision No. 2774 of 2012

¶2

(1)

¶3

IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Civil Revision No. 2774 of 2012 (O&M)

¶5

Date of decision : 9.5.2012

¶6

Darshan Kumar ..... Petitioner

Sant Ram and others

..... Respondents

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal

¶11

Present: Mr. Ashwani Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

Rajesh Bindal J.

¶13

Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 10.4.2012 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panchkula, whereby the application filed by the petitioner for releasing the amount lying deposited in his name in bank, was dismissed.

¶14

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

¶15

Briefly, the facts are that the petitioner was injured in an accident. He was granted compensation of ` 8,19,000/- along with interest. The amount was directed to be deposited in the FDR, which is now sought to be encashed.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner wants to purchase land to build a house as there is no shelter for his family. He has entered into an agreement for purchase of land for a sum of 12,00,000/-. Earnest money of 2,00,000/- has already been paid and balance is to be paid upto 10.5.2012. The application filed by him before the Tribunal was rejected. He further submitted that the amount awarded to the major/ adult cannot be ordered to be kept in a fixed deposit. He has referred to the 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. The prayer is for release of amount lying in the FDR.

¶17

Civil Revision No. 2774 of 2012

¶18

(2)

¶19

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I find merit in the submissions made.

¶20

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

¶21

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. The petitioner is directed to place on record a copy of the sale-deed before the Tribunal within one month after its registration.

¶22

The revision petition is disposed of in the manner indicated

¶23

above.

¶24

Copy of the order be given dasti to the counsel for the petitioner under the signatures of Bench Secretary of this Court.

¶25

9.5.2012 vs.

¶26

(Rajesh Bindal) Judge

Darshan Kumar v. Sant Ram and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Darshan Kumar v. Sant Ram and Others

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

Aviva Life Insurance Comp. Ltd. and Anr. Vs M/S S.S. Saini Estates and Developers

Rajinder Singh Vs State Bank of Patiala

Attam Darshi Singh Vs Simrat Singh & Anr.

Harkam Singh Vs Hy St.

Harbans Kaur Vs Land Acquisition Collector etc.

Mam Chand etc. Vs State of Haryana & Anr.