C.R.No.4370 of 2009 #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.4370 of 2009 Date of Order: 25.4.2011 Gurbir Singh .....Petitioner Vs. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rupnagar .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Jatin Salwan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Shivay Dhir, Advocate for claimant-Kulwant Kaur. Mr. A.S. Grewal, Addl.A.G, Punjab with Mr. A.K. Malhotra, District Treasury Officer, Rupnagar. Mr. Aseem Aggarwal, Advocate for New India Assurance Company. JASWANT SINGH, J (ORAL) Petitioner-Gurbir Singh (claimant) was held entitled to compensation of Rs.10,05,033/- (Ten lac, five thousand and Thirty Three only) including the interest vide award dated 13.9.2001 passed by the learned MACT, Ropar in MACT Case No.68 dated 28.9.2000 on account of death of his wife. It appears that a sum of Rs.4,53,553/- was wrongly disbursed to the petitioner, which was otherwise meant for another claimant-Kulwant Kaur in an another case. It is given out that many claimants in similar situation had been wrongly disbursed the amount meant for other claimants due to inadvertent mistake by the office of the learned MACT, Ropar. Petitioner-Gurbir Singh has approached this Court under C.R.No.4370 of 2009 #2# Article 227 of the Constitution praying for setting aside the order dated 18.7.2009 (P.1) whereby in the execution application filed by the other claimant-Kulwant Kaur, it was ordered that the aforesaid amount of Rs.4,53,553/- wrongly disbursed to him be re-deposited and disbursed to Kulwant Kaur with liberty to the petitioner-Gurbir Singh to file a separate application for release of the said amount lying deposited purportedly in the account of other claimants. Notice of the present revision petition was issued to the Treasury Officer, Ropar as well as New India Assurance Company Ltd, Branch Office Sarkaghat, District Mandi (Himachal Pradesh) on 31.8.2009. Upon notice, respondents had pointed out that the amount paid by the respective Insurance Company had been deposited, however, the Nazir of the Court while issuing vouchers had committed a mistake by intermingling the names of the claimants and the revenue deposits. This Court vide order dated 24.5.2010 had passed the following order: “Gurbir Singh son of Rajinder Singh resident of House No.876 Phase VII, SAS Nagar Mohali and others filed claim petition No.68 which was accepted vide Award dated 13.9.2001 and an amount of Rs.8,71,000/- was allowed. New India Insurance Company preferred FAO No.1015 of 2002 in the High Court and the same was dismissed on 21.2.2002. It is alleged that an amount of Rs.9,80,033/- was deposited vide RD No.902 payable in favour of Gurbir Singh and others. Kulwant Kaur, Krishan Kaur and Jeet Singh, legal heirs of Didar Singh have also preferred the claim petition and it is alleged that an amount of Rs.4,53,553/- payable to them was deposited on 1.8.2002 vide RD No.868. As per finding of the Tribunal/Executive Court, the amount belonging to Kulwant Kaur has been paid to Gurbir Singh. It is not clear from the record to whom the amount belonging to Gurbir Singh etc, deposited vide RD No.902 dated 19.8.2002, has been paid/disbursed. C.R.No.4370 of 2009 #3# Nazar of District Judge, Ropar is ordered to be present along with the relevant register on the next date of hearing i.e 6.8.2010. So, in these circumstances the District Judge, Ropar is directed to hold an inquiry himself or through an Additional District Judge to find out who has received the amount belonging to Gurbir Singh deposited vide RD No.902 dated 19.8.2002 and sent the report before the next date. The District Treasury Officer, Ropar who is present in the Court is also directed to look into the matter and to find out where the amount of Gurbir Singh has gone. From the perusal of the register maintained by the District Treasury Officer, regarding the deposit of amount by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, it is revealed that only RD number with the amount is mentikoned and to whom the amount is payable, is not entered in the said register. It is admitted during the course of arguments that whenever Insurance Company or any other person deposit the amount payable to the claimants in accident cases, it is accompanied by a letter giving details to whom the amount is payable. The Nazar of District Court entered that amount in the register maintained at the office of District Judge and sent the cheque to the Treasury for issuing a RD number. It has been further pointed out that while forwarding the cheque, the District Treasury Officer, name of the parties to whom the amount of compensation is payable, is not mentioned and consequently the District Treasury Officer, could not record the details to whom the amount relating to the RD number it relates. So, in these circumstances, the District Treasury Officer, has to obey the order of the Court in making the payment without verifying whether the amount is being paid to the actual person for whom the same has been deposited by the concerned quarter. From the facts of the present case, it is revealed that the amount belonging to Kulwant Kaur etc has been paid under the orders of the Court to Gurbir Singh etc claimants. However, it also emerges out that Gurbir Singh has not been paid any extra amount and has been paid the due amount only. Had the District Treasury Officer, mentioned the fact in the RD number to whom C.R.No.4370 of 2009 #4# the amount is payable, the above error/confusion would not have cropped. So, in these circumstances, all the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in the States of Punjab, Haryana and Union Territory, Chandigarh are directed to give the details of the claimants, while forwarding the cheque or cash amount to the concerned District Treasury Officers. District Treasury Officers of the State of Punjab, Haryana and Union Territory Chandigarh are directed to mention the details of claimants/decree holders in their register while accepting the amount of cheque, draft/cash. Whenever DRO is issued by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, it should give the details of name of the claimants and the amount payable to them and the District Treasury Officer, shall cross-check that amount has been disbursed to the right claimants/decree holders. The copy of this order be conveyed to all the District Treasury Officers in States of Punjab, Haryana and Union Territory and District Judges of Punjab and Haryana and Union Territory, who will circulate these directions to all the Motor Accident Claims Tribunals working in that District. Report in this regard be sent before 6.8.2010.” In compliance of the aforesaid order dated 24.5.2010, Sh. Surender Mohan, Additional District Judge, Rupnagar had conducted an inquiry and reported that the amount deposited for payment to Gurbir Singh had been released to other claimants whereas he had been paid out of claims meant to be paid to other claimants due to the mistake of the then Nazar attached to the Court. Vide order dated 14.1.2011, this Court had directed Sh. Manish Grover, Nazir of the office of District & Sessions Judge, Rupnagar exercising the powers of concerned MACT to update his records in consultation with the District Treasury Officer concerned. Sh. A.K. Malhotra, District Treasury Officer, Rupnagar has C.R.No.4370 of 2009 #5# subsequently filed his additional affidavit dated 9.3.2011 on behalf of respondent No.2 wherein it is admitted that the records have been updated in consultation with the record of the learned MACT, Ropar. It is further admitted by the parties that the petitioner-Gurbir Singh has been released his entire amount of compensation from RD No.902 as also from RD Nos.868,885 and 886, which belong to other claimants whose payment are still to be released. Kulwant Kaur's claim for her compensation relates to RD No.868 and she has not been given any amount of compensation till now. Relevant part of Para 3 of the aforesaid affidavit reads thus: “That the predecessor of the present Nazar of Ld. MACT Rupnagar had disturbed the payments of the MACT cases and had authorized the payments in MACT cases from different. RD Numbers and resultantly disturbed the whole chain in respect of MACT cases. The same thing has been done in the case of Gurbir Singh and Kulwant Kaur. From upto date checking of the record of this office, it is revealed that balance amounts in the RD numbers are lying unpaid since long and no claim has been preferred against them uptill now. The detail of which is as under:- Honourable District & Sessions Judge, Rupnagar has also been conveyed regarding the said report vide this office Letter No.1135/PLC dated 28.2.2011 and a copy of the same is Annexure R.2. The office of Ld. District & Sessions Judge Ropar informed vide its Letter dated 7.3.2011 (R.3) that there amounts stands already paid Detail of R.D numbers of balance amounts. R.D.No. Date Amount 628 17.8.98 25000 xx xx xx xx xx xx 711 11/01/2002 2500 Total 875695” In para 3 of the aforesaid affidavit, it is given out that a sum of Rs.8,75,695/- (Eight lacs, seventy five thousand six hundred Ninety five C.R.No.4370 of 2009 #6# only) is lying unpaid in other stated RDs since long and no claim has been preferred against them uptill now. Learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from Sh. A.K. Malhotra, District Treasury Officer states that the said amount lying unpaid in the stated RDs relates to claimants whose compensation claim have already been satisfied by payment from other Rds not relating to them. It is further submitted that dissatisfied claims of the various claimants can be met if the learned MACT, Rupnagar is directed to issue vouchers as per the entitlement of the claimants to be paid from the amount lying in the stated Rds as indicated in para 3, which have been identified in consultation with the record of the learned MACT. Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as counsel appearing for claimant-Kulwant Kaur and Insurance Company have no objection to such directions be issued. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, states that as far as claim of the petitioner-Gurbir Singh is concerned, the present petition has become infructuous. In view of the agreed stand by learned state counsel as well as counsel for dissatisfied claimant-Kulwant Kaur, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rupnagar to issue necessary vouchers as per entitlement of the various claimants keeping in view the contents of para 3 of the aforesaid affidavit and the amount of compensation be released in accordance with law. April 25, 2011 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE