The petitioner has filed this petition under Article-226 of the Constitution of India praying for quashing and setting aside the order dated 19.4.2010 passed below Ex.1 by the learned Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (Main), Gandhinagar in Civil Misc. Application No.173 of 2010. The petitioner has also prayed for release of the amount of Rs.1,50,435/- invested in the FDR with the Dena Bank, Asarwa Branch, Ahmedabad.
This Court has issued notice on 28.4.2010. Pursuant to the notice Mr.Nagesh Sood, learned advocate appeared for respondent No.3 Insurance Company. Notice issued to respondent Nos.1 and 2 has not come back. However, the main contesting party is respondent No.3 as the amount is deposited by the respondent No.3 pursuant to the order passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal and hence the presence of the respondent Nos.1 and 2 is not required.
It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is a legal heir/daughter of original claimant in Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Fast Track Court No.4, Gandhinagar whereby a final award was passed in favour of the original claimant dated 31.2.2006 of Rs.6,01,740/-. Out of the total final award, Rs.1,50,435/- was directed to be deposited in the name of the petitioner. Pursuant to the said order the petitioner moved an application before the Claim Tribunal for release/withdrawal of FDR amount. However, the said application was rejected by the Tribunal vide its order dated 19.4.2010.
It is this order, which is under challenge in the present petition.
Mr.Pratik Barot, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the amount sought to be withdrawn is on account of the marriage of the petitioner on 16.5.2010 with one Satishkumar D. Patel at Mansa. He has further submitted that the petitioner has no other means to meet with the marriage expenses and hence the amount is required to be released. The Tribunal did not consider this aspect in proper perspective and hence the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is required to be quashed and set aside and proper direction should be issued to the Tribunal allowing the petitioner to withdraw the said amount.
Mr.Nagesh Sood, learned advocate appearing for the respondent No.3 Insurance Company, on the other hand, has submitted that the amount was deposited only for the purpose of considering the interest of the petitioner and if the amount is not utilized for the same, it would not be useful to the petitioner in future. He has, therefore, submitted that no interference is required with the order passed by the Tribunal.
Having heard learned advocates appearing for the parties and having considered the facts of the present case it appears that because of the marriage of the petitioner the petitioner requires this amount to meet with the expenses and considering such occasion the Tribunal should not have rejected the application in its entirety. Even if the entire amount cannot be allowed to be withdrawn the part of the amount can certainly be permitted to be withdrawn.
Considering facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the object for which the amount is sought to be withdrawn, the Court is of the view that interest of justice would better be served if the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the amount of Rs.75,000/- for her marriage. Accordingly the Claim Tribunal is hereby directed to allow the petitioner to withdraw the amount of Rs.75,000/- out of the FDR of Rs.1,50,435/- lying with the Dena Bank, Asarwa Branch, Ahmedabad. For this purpose if the FDR is prematurely required to be encashed the Bank should be directed accordingly.
With this direction, this petition is accordingly disposed of without any order as to costs.
Direct service is permitted.
(K. A. PUJ, J.) kks Top