LAWS(RAJ)-2015-10-137

TRILOK CHAND & OTHERS Vs. VINOD & OTHERS

Decided On October 08, 2015
Trilok Chand And Others Appellant
V/S
Vinod And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A challenge has been made to order dated 18-5-2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tonk (hereinafter 'the Tribunal') dismissing petitioner's application for premature encashment of two FDRs of Rs.90,000/- and 1,50,000/- respectively.

(2.) The facts of the case are that on 6-12-2014 an award of Rs.5,40,000/- was passed by the Tribunal in favour of the petitioners of which Rs.1 lac deposited in saving accounts of Trilok Chand and Abhishek, Rs.90,000/- and 1,50,000/- were kept in five year FDRs in their name and Rs.2 lacs in a FDR in the name of Kundan Kumar for ten years. On 20-4-2015 the petitioners Trilok Chand and Abhishek moved an application before the Tribunal for premature encashment of their FDRs of Rs.90,000/- and 1,50,000/- on the ground of marriage of Abhishek on 8-5-2015. The Tribunal vide impugned order dated 18-5-2015 has held that in terms of judgment in the case of Kapil Lodha Vs. The Judge MACT Jaipur, 2015 1 ACC 407 it had no jurisdiction to vary its award and direct for premature encashment of FDRs. The application was dismissed.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Tribunal's order dated 18-5-2015 is perverse, unjust and harsh. It has acted arbitrarily in refusing premature encashment of petitioners' FDRs, as the money was required for Abhishek's marriage. The judgment in the case of Kapil Lodha was not applicable as what was sought was not a review but further directions permissible in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation Trivandrum Vs. Mrs. Susamma Thomas, 1994 AIR(SC) 1631. It has been submitted that without encashment of the two FDRs the petitioners are paying a much higher interest rate on money borrowed from the market than the interest on the FDRs. Abhishek's marriage was a social/ personal necessity and expenditure thereon unavoidable. In the circumstances the Tribunal ought to have allowed premature encashment of the FDRs in the name of Trilok Chand and Abhishek Kumar.