-1- 2025:CGHC:873 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 388 of 2024 1 - Mrs. Neetu Sahu W/o Late Raghuvir Sahu Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Siltara, Police Station Pathariya, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh. 2 - Kumari Tanu, D/o Late Raghuvir Sahu Aged About 3 Years Minor, Represented Through Mother Mrs. Neetu Sahu W/o Late Raghuvir Sahu, Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Siltara, Police Station Pathariya, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chandan Kumar Sahu S/o Late Raghuvir Sahu, Aged About 9 Years Minor, Represented Through Mother Mrs. Neetu Sahu W/o Late Raghuvir Sahu, Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Siltara, Police Station Pathariya, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh. 4 - Mrs. Dukhiya Bai W/o Uttara Kumar Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Siltara, Police Station Pathariya, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh. 5 - Uttara Kumar S/o Derharam Sahu, Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Siltara, Police Station Pathariya, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Vijay Kumar Sahu S/o Dharmu Sahu, Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Siltara, Police Station Pathariya, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh (Driver Of Motor Cycle No. C.G. -25-J-8709) 2 - Khem Singh Sahu S/o Uderam Sahu Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Bodtara, Police Station Navagarh, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh. (Owner Of Motor Cycle No. C.G. -25-J-8709) 3 - Tata A.I.G. General Insurance Company Limited, Through The Branch Manager, Branch Office Fourth Floor, Gwalani, Chamber, Near I.C.I.C.I. Bank, Vyapar Vihar Road, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. (Insurer Of Motor Cycle No. C.G. -25- Digitally signed by REKHA SINGH -2- J-8709) ... Respondents For Petitioners : Ms. Ashtha Sharma, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 07.01.2025 1) Heard. 2) The petitioners have filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set- aside the impugned order dated 15.04.2024 (Annexure P/1) and further be pleased to direct the learned Claims Tribunal to disburse the amount of compensation to the petitioners, which is kept in fixed deposit in the name of petitioners. 10.2 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.” 3) Ms. Sharma, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would argue that in Claim Case bearing registration No. MACT No.1005/2021, an award of Rs.20,00,000/- was passed in favour of the petitioners on 15.11.2022. She would submit that a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- was awarded in favour of petitioner No.1 (wife of deceased), Rs.1,00,000/- was awarded in favour of petitioner No.4 (mother of the deceased) and Rs.1,00,000/- was awarded in favour of petitioner No.5 (father of the deceased) and these amounts were deposited in a fixed deposit account of a bank for a period of three years. She would contend that an application was moved by petitioner No.1 alone before the learned Claims Tribunal for the withdrawal of the entire amount deposited in favour of petitioners No.1,4 & 5 for the construction of the house. She would further contend that -3- sufficient documents were filed along with the application before the Claims Tribunal but the application was rejected on the ground that no consent was given by the parents of the deceased. She would also submit that the parents have given their consent vide Annexure P/6 dated 25.04.2024, therefore, an appropriate direction may be issued to the learned Claims Tribunal to release the aforesaid amount. 4) I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the documents placed on the record. 5) Taking into consideration the fact that the application of petitioner No.1 was rejected in the absence of consent of the parents of the deceased and in the present case, a letter of consent has already been placed on record, therefore, the order passed by the learned Claims Tribunal is hereby quashed. 6) The petitioner would be at liberty to move a fresh application along with necessary documents and a letter of consent of parents before the Claims Tribunal and the concerned Tribunal is directed to decide it expeditiously preferably within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Learned Claims Tribunal is directed to take a decision with regard to the release of the amount after verifying the fact of necessity. 7) With the aforesaid observation(s)/direction(s), the present petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha