1 2025:CGHC:52046 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 826 of 2025 1 - Roopram Bhardwaj S/o Samaru Ram Bhardwaj Aged About 44 Years R/o Village- Salihabhantha, Police Station Urga, Tehsil- Kartala, District- Korba ( C.G.) (Claimant) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Nakul Patel S/o Samar Patel Aged About 47 Years R/o Village- Sumedha, Police Station- Bankimongra, Tehsil- Katghora District- Korba ( C.G. ) 2 - Indian Oil Corporation Limited By Proprietor Ajay Gatlewar R/o Bulk Explosives, Auxiliary Plant ( Explosive Plant ), Post Office- Kusmunda, Tehsil- Katghora, District- Korba ( C.G. ). 3 - Divivsional Manager United India Insurance Company Limited, Address- Station Road, Sitamani, Tehsil And District- Korba ( C.G. ). ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Priya Kaiwartt, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Shruti Jha, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Anand Shukla, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput) Order on Board 17/10/2025 1. This writ petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India has been filed being aggrieved by the order dated 23.06.2025 passed by the 3rd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Korba (CG) (for short “ the Tribunal”) in Case No.61/ 2025. 2 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner met with an accident on 13.1.2022 due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle i.e. Truck bearing No. CG 12 AZ 6384. As a result of said accident, the petitioner has become permanently disabled. Consequently, an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘MV Act’) was filed by the petitioner before the tribunal, which was registered as Claim Case No.39/2022. Vide its award dated 10.09.2024 the learned tribunal has granted compensation of Rs.25,05,699.95/- along with 6% interest. The insurance company of the offending vehicle was directed to pay the amount. In compliance of said award, the insurance company has deposited the awarded amount. Out of the total amount deposited, Rs.5-5 lacs each for 1,2, 3, 4 & 5 years has been invested in a fixed deposit. The petitioner has become disabled by both legs and also sustained an amputation. Previously, an amount of Rs.10 lacs was prematurely paid to the petitioner for the purpose of his daughter’s wedding. Thereafter, out of remaining Rs.15 lacs held as fixed deposit, the petitioner submitted a further application for premature disbursement, stating that he is seriously ill and has fluid in his lungs. He has difficulty breathing and suffers from high blood pressure and diabetes and he has been advised by the doctor for immediate medical treatment, for which the petitioner is in urgent need of Rs.5 lacs. An application to this effect was moved before the learned tribunal and vide impugned order, Rs. 2 lacs was permitted to be prematurely disbursed out of the prayer for Rs. 5 lacs. He further submits that the said amount would not be sufficient for the medical treatment of the petitioner, she therefore, invited the attention of this Court to various medical documents appended with the writ petition. Therefore, she prays that a further sum of Rs.3 lacs may be prematurely disbursed in favour of the petitioner after breaking the fixed deposit of the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that respondent No.3 has already complied with the award dated 23.06.2025. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3 5. From a perusal of the impugned award, it appears that the petitioner has become permanently disabled. The learned tribunal has found the petitioner to be 100% disabled. It also appears that he has sustained an amputation. According to the record, a sum of Rs. 10 lacs was prematurely disbursed to the petitioner for the purpose of his daughter’s marriage. Furthermore, Rs.2 lacs has also been disbursed for his medical treatment, pursuant to an application made by him. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and the medical documents appended to the writ petition, this Court is of the opinion that the further sum of Rs.3 lacs claimed by the petitioner can be prematurely disbursed. Therefore, this writ petition is allowed and it is ordered that a sum of Rs.3 lacs may be disbursed to the petitioner after breaking the fixed deposit made in his name. The learned tribunal is expected to do the same within a reasonable period of time. 6. With this observation, this writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) JUDGE Parul PARUL MITTAL Digitally signed by PARUL MITTAL Date: 2025.10.17 17:09:52 +0530