Neither the Tribunal in its award number the High Court in its order enhancing companypensation had directed to invest the amount of companypensation in long term fixed deposit.
It was also stated that the second appellant Poornachandrika is a M.Sc.
1 is the widow and appellant Nos.2 and 3 are the daughters of the said T.S. Subrahmanyam.
On 31.1.2008, the appellants filed an application before the Tribunal praying for release of the amount in deposit in favour of appellant No.
3 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. deposited in the Tribunal an amount of Rs.6,33,038/ on 7.1.2008.
Respondent Nos.
The second daughter was stated to be residing in a rented house paying exorbitant rent which she companyld number afford in view of the spiralling companyts.
In this case, the victim of the accident died on 21.7.1993.
Even in the case of literate persons, the Tribunals are automatically ordering investment of the amount of companypensation in long term fixed deposit without recording that having regard to the age or fiscal background or the strata of the society to which the claimant belongs or such other companysiderations, the Tribunal thinks it necessary to direct such investment in the larger interests of the claimant and with a view to ensure the safety of the companypensation awarded to him.
Hence a change of attitude and approach on the part of the Tribunals is necessary in the interest of justice.
It was pointed out that if the money was locked up in a nationalised bank, only the bank would be benefited by the deposit as they give a paltry interest which companyld number be equated to the companyts of materials which were ever increasing.
One T.S. Subrahmanyam met with a motor accident on 12.11.1991 and died on 21.7.1993 due to injuries sustained in the accident.
The first appellant was already aged 71 years and her health was number very good.
Along with the application, the second and third appellants had filed separate affidavits supporting the prayer in the application and stating that they had numberobjection to the amount being paid to the first appellant.
The appellants filed a further application dated 19.6.2008 praying to disburse the entire amount to the decree holders without insisting on deposit of any portion of the amount in any nationalized bank.
This has resulted in serious injustice and hardship to the claimants.
In appeal, the High Court of Karnataka vide its order dated 6.7.2006 enhanced the amount of companypensation to Rs.4,25,000/ .
1, 2 and 4 in the writ petition.
It was further stated in the application that the first appellant was obliged to provide a shelter to the first daughter Poornachandrika.
1, A.V. Padma.
The award was passed by the Tribunal on 15.2.2002.
It was stated that they were well versed in managing their lives and finances.
2 and 3 filed affidavits stating that they had numberobjection to the payment of the amount to their mother A.V. Padma.
In the application filed by the appellants on 19.6.2008 seeking withdrawal of the amount without insisting on investment of any portion of the amount in long term deposit, it was specifically stated that the first appellant is an educated lady who retired as a Superintendent of the Karnataka Road Transport Corporation, Bangalore.
The Tribunals appear to think that in view of the guidelines issued by this Court, in every case the amount of companypensation should be invested in long term fixed deposit and under numbercircumstances the Tribunal can release the entire amount of companypensation to the claimant even if it is required by him.
10405/2008 which was dismissed by the High Court of Karnataka as per order dated 5.8.2008 which is impugned in this appeal.
The Insurance Company deposited the companypensation amount in the Tribunal on 7.1.2008.
The amount of companypensation was enhanced by the High Court on 6.7.2006.
She required money for maintenance and also to put up companystruction on the existing house to provide dwelling house for her second daughter who was a company owner along with her.
1 to 3 herein were respondent Nos.
In the claim petition filed by the appellants who are the legal heirs of T.S. Subrahmanyam, the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal I, Mysore for short, the Tribunal passed an award granting Rs.60,000/ as companypensation.
Appellants Nos.
10405 of 2008 in the High Court of Karnataka.
It was further stated that the delay in payment of companypensation amount exposed the appellants to serious prejudice and economic ruin.
CYRIAC JOSEPH, J. Leave granted.
degree holder and the third appellant Shalini was holding Master Degree both in Commerce and in Philosophy.
The appellants were the petitioners in Writ Petition No.
However, by an order dated 28.6.2008, the Tribunal rejected the prayer for release of the amount of Rs.2,00,000/ deposited in the nationalized bank.
While rejecting the application of the appellants, the Tribunal did number companysider any of the above mentioned aspects mentioned in the application.
Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the appellants filed Writ Petition No.
2 and 3 and to disburse only the balance amount to the appellants.
Respondent No.
However, the Tribunal directed to invest Rs.1,00,000/ each in long term deposits in favour of appellant Nos.
Appellant No.
The Tribunals very often dispose of the claimants application for withdrawal of the amount of companypensation in a mechanical manner and without proper application of mind.
