🖨️ Print / Download PDF

Smt. Asini Vs Rajender Singh and others

Case No: CR No. 5090 of 2011

Date of Decision: Nov. 9, 2011

Acts Referred: Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 227#Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166

Hon'ble Judges: Jaswant Singh, J

Bench: Single Bench

Translate: English | हिन्दी | தமிழ் | తెలుగు | ಕನ್ನಡ | मराठी

Judgement

Jaswant Singh, J.@mdashSmt.Asini-mother of the deceased Javed, who had died in a motor vehicular accident, has filed the present revision

petition under Article 227 of the Constitution against the order dated 19.5.2011 (P2) whereby the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,

Palwal (for short the Tribunal) has ordered to release only 50% of the amount of compensation lying deposited in the FDR in the name of the

petitioner/claimant.

2. It is stated that after the death of Javed in a motor vehicular accident, petitioner-mother of the deceased alongwith other claimants had filed a

petition under 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for the grant of compensation. The learned Tribunal vide order dated 24.7.2010 had awarded a total

sum of Rs.4,37,000/-as compensation and out of which Rs.2 lacs were awarded to the petitioner. It was ordered that 50% of the amount

awarded to the petitioner be released to her and the remaining 50% was directed to be deposited in Fixed Deposit Receipt.

3. It is further submitted that the applicant had moved an application dated 11.5.2011 for release of the entire amount of compensation awarded to

her in view of the expenses incurred on the marriage of her daughter. It is apparent that the learned Tribunal vide order dated 24.7.2010 has only

directed release of 50% of the awarded amount and the remaining 50% was directed to be deposited in FDR.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner-applicant being an adult and also having shown the requirement for release of entire

amount, the learned Tribunal has committed illegality in rejecting the prayer of the petitioner for release of entire amount in view of the law laid

down by Hon''ble the Supreme Court in H.S.Ahammed Hussain v. Irfan Ahammed, 2002 (3) RCR (Civil) 563.

5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

6. Keeping in view the enunciation of law as referred to above and further coupled with the need of the petitioner as detailed hereinabove, the

impugned order dated 19.5.2011 passed by learned Tribunal is modified to the extent that the entire amount of compensation falling to the share of

the petitioner, who is a major shall be released to her.

7. This order is being passed without issuing notice to the respondents, as no relief has been sought against them.

8. Disposed of in the above terms.