MEENA DEVI Vs. ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioners are the claimants who had been granted compensation by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala vide award dated May 2, 1996. The amount of compensation had been enhanced by the High Court vide judgment dated Oct. 13, 2010 while deciding the cross-appeals. In FAO No. 2282 of 1996 titled Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Meena Devi and others, an interim order was passed on Feb. 19, 1998, annexure P-2, ordering that half of the amount awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal on May 2, 1996 be released to the claimants and rest of 50% of the awarded amount be deposited by the Oriental Insurance Company - respondent No.2 in five different FDRs @ 11.5% compounding quarterly interest with respondent No.l. The payment of the FDRs was specifically ordered to be subject to the Court order. On Feb. 21, 2011, the petitioners filed an application before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala, for release of the five FDRs issued pursuant to the interim orders dated Feb. 19, 1998 vide an application annexure P-5. The said application was finally disposed of by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala on Nov. 17, 2011. As Seema Gupta had died,it was ordered that the FDR pertaining to Seema Gupta be released to her husband Harish Kumar Mittal, who was also the natural guardian of other natural heirs of Seema Gupta. Despite the final decision of the FAOs and orders of the Executing Court, no payment was made by respondent No.l Bank, therefore, a representation was sent on behalf of the petitioners on Nov. 29, 2011 to make the payments of the above said FDRs along with 11.5% interest compounding quarterly. As no response was received, another representation was submitted to the Chairman of the Bank on Dec. 20, 2011 for disbursement of the FDRs amount along with interest. Copy of the representation has been appended with the petition as annexure P-8. As considerable period passed and no response was received, another representation was filed by the claimants/legal representatives for release of FDRs along with interest. A complaint was filed before the Banking Ombudsman - respondent No.3 on Feb. 6, 2012, annexure P-9, to take action in the matter as the money was not being paid to the claimants of the deceased. Respondent No.l Bank sent the following reply to the petitioners on Feb. 15, 2012:-

(2.) Copy of the reply of the Bank has been appended with the petition as annexure P-10. The petitioners claimed that they were surprised to note that the FDRs were made for a period of 5 years only in contravention to the order dated Feb. 19, 1998 passed by the High Court in FAO No. 2282 of 1996. In response to letter annexure P-10, dated Feb. 15, 2012, the petitioners addressed a letter to respondent No.l Bank calling upon the Bank to issue suitable directions to the Branch Office, Tripri, Patiala, to make the payments as per the orders of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dated Feb. 19, 1998 and order of Additional District Judge, Patiala dated Nov. 17, 2011, vide annexure P-l1 dated Feb. 27, 2012 but the petitioners received a letter from the Bank that 5 FDRs were made on May 16, 1998 as per the orders of the District Judge, Patiala, carrying rate of interest at the rate of 11.5%. There was no court's orders for the renewal of these FDRs. As per the bank's policy, in the case of encashment of over-due term deposit interest for the overdue period shall be paid at the rates applicable to saving bank deposit as such the matter was closed under Clause 13 (a) of the BOS, 2006.

(3.) Aggrieved by the action of respondent No.l in not making payments of FDRs along with 11.5% interest compounding quarterly as per the orders passed by the High Court on Feb. 19, 1998 in FAO No. 2282 of 1996, the petitioners have preferred this writ petition.