Disposed¶15

Raj Karan v. Union of India

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Aug 2025FAO/119/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Release of compensation kept in fixed deposits; major claimant; Railway Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh order dated 06.01.2025 modified; parameters for fixed-deposit investment of compensation from Kamaljit Kaur and others Vs. Union of India, FAO No.4331 of 2024 (decided 12.09.2024); Apex Court guidelines in General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation; Paritosh Kumar; decided 01.08.2025.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 06.01.2025 modified to the extent that the amount awarded to the claimants is ordered to be released; pending application(s), if any, disposed of. ¶15

Raj Karan Vs Union of India — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

S.No.221

¶2

The appellants are aggrieved of the part of the order passed by the Tribunal whereby 90% of the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal has been ordered to be kept in fixed deposits in the name of the claimant even though the appellant is major. The issue with respect to directions being issued by the Tribunal directing the compensation amount to be kept in fixed deposits has been elaborately dealt with by this Court in the case of Kamaljit Kaur and others Vs. Union of India bearing FAO No.4331 of 2024 decided on 12.09.2024 wherein this Court observed as under:

¶3

“9. Thus, in view of aforesaid decisions, it is evident that the guidelines issued by Apex Court in the case of General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation’s ibid, were issued to protect the rights of the claimants, who are :

¶4

a) the minors;

¶5

PARITOSH KUMAR 2025.08.02 12:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this Judicial Record/Decree/Document

¶6

b) under some disability; and

¶7

c) widows and illiterate persons

¶8

i.e. those who apprehend threat at the hands of unscrupulous elements and lack fiscal discipline.

¶9

The guidelines are not to be interpreted like statute but need to be followed in a more pragmatic manner. The Tribunals are right in ordering investment of compensation in Fixed Deposits in the case where a claimant is prone to being robbed off the compensation awarded. Thus, the broad parameters that can be laid down are that the Tribunals should order Fixed Deposits only in those cases where:

¶10

(a) the claimant is a minor. From awarded compensation the share of the minor should be ordered to be invested in Fixed Deposits till he/she attains the age of majority or till the parents/guardians show pressing need to spend the amount for the benefit of minor;

¶11

(b) where the claimant is a physically disabled person owing to some disability arising out of birth, injury or extremely old age and the Tribunal is satisfied that the claimant will not be able to protect his/her money from unscrupulous elements; and

¶12

¶13

The list is merely illustrative and not exhaustive. In cases where claimants are major and there is no apprehension that they may fall prey to unscrupulous elements or touts/unethical arrangements etc., the amount need not be invested in Fixed Deposits.

¶14

In view of aforesaid parameters laid down by this Court, the appeals are allowed. However, in appeals bearing bearing FAO Nos.4331 & 4333 of 2024, wherein the claimant(s) are minors and in view of the fact that their interest needs to be taken care of, the compensation amount of the minors is ordered to be kept in fixed deposits till he/she attains the age of majority or till the parents/guardians exhibit pressing need to take care of the expenses for the betterment of the minors.

¶15

The present appeal is thus disposed off in the aforesaid terms. Impugned order dated 06.01.2025 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal,

¶16

PARITOSH KUMAR 2025.08.02 12:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this Judicial Record/Decree/Document

¶17

Chandigarh is modified to the extent that the amount awarded to the claimants is ordered to be released.

¶18

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.

¶19

August 01, 2025 Paritosh Kumar

¶20

PARITOSH KUMAR 2025.08.02 12:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this Judicial Record/Decree/Document

Raj Karan v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Karan v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bimla Devi @ Bimla Patil Vs Kunal Sachdev

Bimla Devi @ Bimla Patil Vs Kunal Sachdeva and Ors.

United India Ins. Co.Ltd. Vs Krishna Kumari and Ors.

Kuldeep Singh and Anr. Vs Union of India

Jaswinder Singh Vs UOI and Another

Ravjot Singh Vs Gaurav Yadav, Dgp Punjab and Others