C.R. No. 5045 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 5045 of 2011 Date of Decision: 15.11.2011 Union of India and others ....Petitioners. Versus Mrs. Boski Jain and others ...Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Ms. Meenakashi Choudhary, Advocate for Mr. Ram Chander, Advocate for the petitioners. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. By way of instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 23.4.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ludhiana (In short “the Tribunal”) whereby the respondents were held entitled to interest. 2. Put shortly, the facts necessary for adjudication as narrated in the petition are that the respondents filed an application for executing the award dated 11.12.2004 passed by the Tribunal. In pursuance thereof, the petitioners had deposited a sum of Rs.9,28,905/- on 7.9.2005 as compensation including interest till date of deposit before the Tribunal. The amount payable to claimant No.2-minor was to be deposited in the Bank in the shape of FDR for the period till he attains C.R. No. 5045 of 2011 -2- majority. Further, the amount of claimants No.1 and 3 was also to be deposited in the Bank in the shape of FDR for the period of two years. Therefore, the claimants claimed that since the amount was deposited in the Court and was not put in FDR, therefore, they were entitled for interest on such amount from the date of deposit, i.e. 7.9.2005. The executing Court accepted the plea of the claimants. The petitioners are aggrieved against the directions given by the executing Court. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. Learned counsel submitted that in pursuance of the award, dated 11.12.2004, the petitioners had deposited the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal on 7.9.2005 in Court and, therefore, they were not liable to pay interest on the compensation from the date of deposit of the amount. 5. The Tribunal while holding the respondents entitled to interest on the amount of compensation from the date of deposit recorded that as per award dated 11.12.2004, the judgment-debtor was required to deposit the amount of the award within two months, i.e. up to 11.2.2005 whereas the amount was deposited on 7.9.2005. As per award, the amount of compensation was to be put in the shape of FDR and the judgment-debtor did not inform the decree-holder regarding the deposit of the amount and in such a situation, the FDR could not be prepared. The decree-holders came to know about the deposit only on 13.9.2010 when they received reply filed by judgment-debtor to the execution petition filed by them. As there was no fault on the part of the decree-holders, the executing court, thus, held that decree-holders are entitled to interest on the principal amount of Rs.7,38,542/- at the rate of C.R. No. 5045 of 2011 -3- 9% per annum as per the award till 13.09.2010, i.e. when they received information on filing reply by the judgment-debtor. 6. No illegality or perversity could be pointed out in the findings recorded by the Tribunal which may warrant interference by this Court in the revisional jurisdiction. Accordingly, there is no merit in the revision petition and the same is hereby dismissed. November 15, 2011 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE