Delhi High Court
Roopa Arora vs New India Assurance Co. on 20 August, 2009
Author: J.R. Midha
3
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CM (M) No.716/2009
% Date of decision: 20th August, 2009
ROOPA ARORA ..... Petitioner
Through : Mr. F.K. Jha, Adv.
along with the petitioner.
versus
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. ..... Respondent
Through : Mr. D.K. Sharma, Adv.
CORAM :-
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may YES
be allowed to see the Judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? YES
3. Whether the judgment should be YES
reported in the Digest?
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. The petitioner has challenged the order of the learned
Tribunal whereby the learned Tribunal has declined to release the
award amount kept in fixed deposit for construction of house to
her.
2. The accident dated 7th November, 2001 resulted in the
death of Rajender Kumar Arora. The deceased was survived by
his widow, three daughters and a son who filed the claim petition
before the learned Tribunal.
3. The learned Tribunal passed an award for Rs.7,29,700/- in
favour of the petitioner on 15th October, 2007. The award
amount was deposited by respondent No.1 and 50% share of the
petitioner was released to her and remaining 50% was directed to
be kept in the fixed deposit for a period of five years.
4. The share of the petitioner in the award amount was
Rs.4,26,248/- out of which Rs.2,13,124/- was released to her and
Rs.2,13,124/- kept in the fixed deposit for a period of five years.
5. The petitioner filed an application before the learned
Tribunal for release of the amount kept in fixed deposit for
construction on the plot purchased by her. The learned Tribunal
directed Rs.50,000/- be released to her. However, the learned
Tribunal declined to release the remaining amount against which
the petitioner has approached this Court.
6. The petitioner is present in the Court along with her brother
and two children. The petitioner has been examined by this
Court.
7. The petitioner submits that she is staying in a rented
accommodation and is paying rent of Rs.2,500/- per month. She
further submits that she has purchased 50 sq. yd. plot on which
the boundary wall has been constructed. The photographs have
been perused from the record of the learned Tribunal. The
petitioner further submits that she intends to construct a house
on the said plot and would be in a position to save rent of
Rs.2,500/- per month being paid every month. Brother of the
petitioner is present in Court and he assures that the house will
be properly constructed on the plot in question.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, Union
Bank of India, Pitam Pura, Delhi is directed to discharge FDR
No.6655164 dated 8th May, 2009 for Rs.1,63,124/- and make the
payment of the FDR amount along with interest thereon to the
petitioner by transferring the said amount to her Saving Bank
Account.
9. The petitioner shall utilize the said amount for construction
of the house. The payment towards the building material be
made by means of a cheques and the statement of account in
respect of the expenditure incurred on the construction be filed
before this Court on the next date of hearing. The petitioner shall
also file photographs upon the completion of construction before
this Court on the next date of hearing.
10. The petition stands disposed of.
11. List for reporting compliance of this order on 22 nd
December, 2009.
12. Perusal of the trial Court record reveals that the petitioners
have not taken the TDS certificate filed by the respondent in
respect of the TDS of Rs.13,382/- deducted from the award
amount. The Court Master is directed to release the TDS
certificate from the trial Court record to the petitioner through
her counsel.
13. Copy of this order be given 'Dasti' to learned counsel for
both the parties under signatures of Court Master.
J.R. MIDHA, J
AUGUST 20, 2009
mk
