Civil Revision No.1549 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 1549 of 2008 Date of decision: September 02, 2008 Rewati and others …..PETITIONERS Versus Shankar Lal Sharma and others …..RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE T.P.S.MANN PRESENT: Mr R.S.Budhwar, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr Nirmal Mittal, Advocate for Insurance Company-respondent No.3. T.P.S.MANN, J. On 1.10.2005, learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kurukshetra accepted the claim petition filed by the petitioners and passed an award, under which an amount of Rs.1,82,800/-was awarded as compensation, along with interest thereon at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its recovery. The entire amount was to be paid by Insurance Company-respondent No.3, which was further given liberty to recover the same from the driver and the owner of the offending vehicle. It was further ordered that Smt Rewati- petitioner would get Rs.82,800/-, while her children would get Rs.20,000/- each, out of the total compensation. The compensation amount was to be deposited in the name of minor children in a Civil Revision No.1549 of 2008 -2- nationalized Bank or Post Office in fixed deposits till they attained majority, whereas half of the compensation amount granted to Smt Rewati was to be deposited in fixed deposit in a nationalized Bank or Post Office for a period of three years. On 3.4.2006, the petitioners filed an application before learned Tribunal that the amount of compensation already stood deposited and the same be released in their favour, as they were in need of the same. The application was, however, dismissed by learned Tribunal by holding that it could not go behind the award passed by it in the execution proceedings, as under the award, the amount was to be released to the petitioners only after security was furnished by the driver and the owner of the offending vehicle, which had not been done by that time. The petitioners are now before this Court in a revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are in dire need of money. Therefore, the amount deposited by the Insurance Company should be released in their favour. It is also submitted that the petitioners cannot be restrained from obtaining the money on the ground that the driver and the owner of the offending vehicle have not furnished the security, as that is a matter between the Insurance Company, on the one hand and the driver and the owner of the offending vehicle, on the other. Learned counsel appearing for Insurance Company- respondent No.3 has submitted that learned Tribunal was perfectly right in declining the application of the petitioners, as neither the driver, nor owner of the offending vehicle had furnished security, as required under Civil Revision No.1549 of 2008 -3- the award. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. . In case, the driver and the owner of the offending vehicle have not furnished security for the amount of compensation deposited by the Insurance Company, the claimants can not be made to suffer. The driver and the owner of the offending vehicle may choose their own time to appear before learned Tribunal and furnish security. This should not come in the way of the claimants in getting the amount of compensation released in their favour. At the same time, the entire amount ordered to be paid to Smt Rewati-petitioner can be released in her favour in spite of the fact that half of the said amount was to be deposited in fixed deposit in some nationalized Bank or Post Office in her name for a period of three years. She is a mature person, who knows how to spend the money wisely. She has to look after a large family, consisting of herself and her five minor children. Keeping the money which is meant for her in fixed deposit for a period of three years is likely to result in Smt Rewati and her minor children coming on the road, may be, going in for begging, so to collect money for their daily needs. In the case of the minor children i.e petitioner Nos.2 to 6, their interest can be well protected by keeping the amount of compensation awarded to them in fixed deposits in some nationalized Bank or Post Office, as directed by the learned Tribunal and to be received by them on their attaining majority. In view of the above, the revision is partly accepted. Directions are given to learned Tribunal to release the entire amount, falling to the share of Smt Rewati-petitioner. This would also include the Civil Revision No.1549 of 2008 -4- amount of her share, which may have been deposited in some nationalized Bank or Post Office by way of fixed deposit. If such a fixed deposit has already been made, it should be prematurely encashed and paid to her along with accrued interest. Impugned order passed by learned Tribunal in so far as it relates to petitioner Nos.2 to 6 does not require any interference and is, accordingly, up-held. September 02, 2008 (T.P.S.MANN) Pds. JUDGE