Reliance General Insurance ... vs Smt. Jadawali Devi W/O Late Satish
2021 Latest Caselaw 7063 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

        S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 100/2021

Reliance   General     Insurance         Company          Limited,    Having    Its
Regional Office At Maker Tower Queens Road, Vaishali Nagar,
Jaipur Through Its Constituent Attorney
                                                                     ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.     Smt. Jadawali Devi W/o Late Satish, R/o Babera, Teh.
       Bansoor, Distt. Alwar.
2.     Rakesh S/o Late Shri Satish, Aged About 7 Years, Being
       Minor Through His Natural Guardian And Mother Smt.
       Jadawali W/o Late Satish, R/o Babera, Teh. Bansoor,
       Distt. Alwar.
3.     Umrav S/o Samdaram (Expire), R/o Babera, Teh. Bansoor,
       Distt. Alwar.
4.     Misrali W/o Samdaram, R/o Babera, Teh. Bansoor, Distt.
       Alwar.
5.     Lalchand S/o Nathuram, R/o Ward No. 18, Mohalla
       Boochaheda, Kotputli, Distt. Jaipur (Driver Of Vehicle No.
       Hr-26-Aw-6975)
6.     Karamveer Bokan S/o Jagveer Singh Gurjar, Begampur
       Kathola, Post Khandasa, Gurgaon, Hariyana (Owner Of
       Vehicle No. Hr-26-Aw-6975)
                                                                 ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Bhargava For Respondent(s) :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

Order

30/11/2021

This misc. application has been filed by the claimants praying

for the release of FDR which stands matured and that the amount

may be paid to the claimants.

(2 of 2) [CMAP-100/2021]

Learned counsel submits that the learned Additional District

& Sessions Judge, Kotputli has failed to take notice that the order

passed by the High Court, for depositing the amount in FDRs and

not releasing the same till further permission of the court, was

interim order and ultimately after the disposal of the appeal itself

on 16.03.2016, the interim order passed in the appeal would not

independently stand but shall merge with the main order.

In view thereof, learned counsel submits that the learned

Additional District & Sessions Judge has erred in not releasing the

amount of the FDR after its maturity.

I have considered the submissions.

The order refusing to release the FDRs which have already

obtained maturity has been passed in a mechanical manner. It

appears that the interim order of the Court has been made as a

basis for denying the release of amount as prayed for by the

claimant. Although it has escaped notice of the learned ADJ that

the interim order passed by the High Court dated 27.03.2014

stood merged with the final judgment passed by the High Court

dated 16.03.2016 and the amount of maturity ought to be

released accordingly.

This application is allowed. The order impugned passed by

the learned ADJ is set aside and the amount shall be released

accordingly.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

SAURABH/38

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)