[2026:RJ-JP:7390] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13423/2023 Prabhdeep Kaur Wife Of Late Dr. Arvinder Pal Singh, Aged About 60 Years, Resident Of Tara Mahindra Hospital, Bharatpur Presently Residing At Mohalla Diwana, Sultanpur Lodhi, District Kapurtala, Punjab. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Jagjeet Singh Son Of Ajmer Singh, Resident Of Village Maharaj Patti, Tehsil Rampura Phool, District Bhatinda, Punjab. (Owner) 2. Pal Singh Son Of Shri Gurudev Singh, Resident Of Village Lahira Mohabbat, Thana Rampura Phool, District Bhatinda, Punjab. (Driver). 3. The New India Insurance Company Limited, Through Its Branch Manager, The New India Insurance Co. Ltd., Amardeep Complex, New Mandi, Station Road, Bharatpur. (Insurer). 4. Guneet Kaur Daughter Of Late Shri Dr. Arvinder Pal Singh, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of Tara Mahindra Hospital, Bharatpur Presently Residing At Mohalla Diwana, Sultanpur Lodhi, District Kapurtala, Punjab. 5. Harneet Son Of Late Dr. Arvinder Pal Singh, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Tara Mahindra Hospital, Bharatpur Presently Residing At Mohalla Diwana, Sultanpur Lodhi, District Kapurtala, Punjab. 6. Pritpal Kaur Wife Of Late Shri Jogendra Singh, Aged About 79 Years, Resident Of House No 786, Gali No 1, Purana Suraj Nagri, Abohar, Fazilka, District Fazilka, Punjab. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mohit Khandelwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Lokesh Parihar HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 16/02/2026 1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner with a challenge to order dated 13.01.2023, passed by the Motor Accident Claims [2026:RJ-JP:7390] (2 of 6) [CW-13423/2023] Tribunal (MACT), Bharatpur on an application filed by the petitioner for premature encashment of all the FDRs in compliance of the award passed by the MACT on 05.12.2020 in Claim Petition No. 197/17. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner requires the money for construction/purchase of the house. He further submits that though the MACT has allowed premature encashment of 4 FDRs of amount of Rs.8,69,973/-, but the same is not sufficient for purchase/construction of the house, therefore, the petitioner may be allowed premature encashment of all the FDRs amounting Rs.86,99,730/- alongwith applicable interest. Counsel for the petitioner relied upon the order dated 19.09.2025, passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12908/2025; Smt. Mamta & Anr. Vs. Sanjeev & Ors. and the order dated 25.03.2021, passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4867/2021; Karnail Singh Vs. Motor Accident Claim Tribunal & Ors. at Principal Seat, Jodhpur. 3. Considered the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner and also perused the material made available on record. 4. The Coordinate Bench of this Court, in the case of Salim Khan Vs. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.;S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6611/2028, decided on 22.05.2018, observed as under:- "By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner- claimant Salim Khan has approached this court with a prayer for directing release of the Fixed Deposit Receipt of Rs.2,14,020/- in his name lying with the Oriental Bank of Commerce, Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar, which was prepared in furtherance of the [2026:RJ-JP:7390] (3 of 6) [CW-13423/2023] award dated 14.07.2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Suratgarh. Facts in brief are that the petitioner’s father Vinod Kumar passed away in an accident on 09.05.2009. Upon a claim application being filed by the claimants, learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Suratgarh awarded a compensation to the tune of Rs.23,70,320/- under the award dated 14.07.2015. The Single Bench of this court in an appeal preferred by the respondent modified the compensation amount to Rs.22,30,000/-. In furtherance of the award, a Fixed Deposit Receipt No.1080044 (A/c No.05423101000543) for a sum of Rs.2,14,020/- was prepared with the Oriental Bank of Commerce, Suratgarh Branch in the name of the petitioner. The petitioner upon gaining majority, filed an application before the Tribunal for release of the aforesaid FDR for his domestic needs and to repay the mortgage loan taken by his mother for buying their house. Learned Tribunal dismissed the application filed by the petitioner vide order dated 01.05.2018 (Annex.5). Hence, the petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition with the above prayer. Having heard and considered the submissions made by the petitioner, present in person, and after going through the material available on record, this court is of the firm opinion that the prayer made by the petitioner is justified. The petitioner received the claim pursuant to the death of his father and he needs the amount of compensation for earning his domestic needs and to repay the house loan and thus, he deserves the relief claimed for. Thus, the writ petition deserves to be and is hereby allowed. The impugned order dated 01.05.2018 (Annex.5) passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Suratgarh is quashed. Learned Tribunal shall forthwith release the Fixed Deposit Receipt No.1080044 (A/c No.05423101000543) for a sum of Rs.2,14,020/- lying with the Oriental Bank of Commerce, Suratgarh Branch in the name of the petitioner after ascertaining his identity. The amount so released shall be credited into the petitioner’s savings bank account." 5. The Coordinate Bench of this Court, in the case of Chanda Devi & Ors. Vs. Rajendra Singh & Ors.; S.B. Civil Writ [2026:RJ-JP:7390] (4 of 6) [CW-13423/2023] Petition No. 14035/2024, decided on 01.09.2025, observed as follows:- "Having heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and upon a perusal of the material available on record, this Court at this juncture deems it apposite to act in consonance with the guidelines spelled out in the ratio of General Manager, Kerela State Transportation Corporation, Trivandram (Supra), the relevant extract of which is reproduced herein below: “17.In a case of compensation for death it is appropriate that the Tribunals do keep in mind the principles enunciated by this Court in Union Carbide Corporation and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.: AIR1992SC248 in the matter of appropriate investments to safeguard the feed from being frittered away by the beneficiaries owing to ignorance, illiteracy and susceptibility to exploitation. In that case approving the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in Muljibhai Ajarambhai Harijan and Anr. v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ors. 1982 1 Guj. LR 756 this Court offered the following guidelines: (i) The Claims Tribunal should, in the case of minors, invariably order the amount of compensation awarded to the minor be invested in long term fixed deposits at least till the date of the minor attaining majority. The expenses incurred by the guardian or next friend may, however, be allowed to be withdrawn; (ii) In the case of illiterate claimants also the Claims Tribunal should follow the procedure set out in (i) above, but if lump sum payment is required for effecting purchases of any movable or immovable property such as, agricultural implements, rickshaw, etc., to earn a living, the Tribunal may consider such a request after making sure that the amount is actually spent for the purpose and the demand is not a ruse to withdraw money; (iii) In the case of semi-literate persons the Tribunal should ordinarily resort to the procedure set out at (i) above unless it is satisfied, for [2026:RJ-JP:7390] (5 of 6) [CW-13423/2023] reasons to be stated in writing, that the whole or part of the amount is required for expanding and existing business or for purchasing some property as mentioned in (ii) above for earning his livelihood, in which case the Tribunal will ensure that the amount is invested for the purpose for which it is demanded and paid; (iv) In the case of literate persons also the Tribunal may resort to the procedure indicated in (i) above, subject to the relaxation set out in (ii) and (iii) above, if having regard to the age, fiscal background and strata of society to which the claimant belongs and such other considerations, the Tribunal in the larger interest of the claimant and with a view to ensuring the safety of the compensation awarded to him thinks it necessary to do order; (v) In the case of widows the Claims Tribunal should invariably follow the procedure set out in (i) above; (vi) In personal injury cases if further treatment is necessary the Claims Tribunal on being satisfied about the same, which shall be recorded in writing, permit withdrawal of such amount as is necessary for incurring the expenses for such treatment; (vii) In all cases in which investment in long term fixed deposits is made it should be on condition that the Bank will not permit any loan or advance on the fixed deposit and interest on the amount invested is paid monthly directly to the claimant or his guardian, as the case may be; (viii) In all cases Tribunal should grant to the claimants liberty to apply for withdrawal in case of an emergency. To meet with such a contingency, if the amount awarded is substantial, the Claims Tribunal may invest it in more than Fixed Deposit so that if need be one such F.D.R. can be liquidated." These guidelines should be borne in mind by the Tribunals in the cases of compensation in accident cases. 18. In the result this appeal succeeds in part and the compensation is determined at Rs. 2,25,000/-. The judgment of the High Court is modified accordingly. No costs.” [2026:RJ-JP:7390] (6 of 6) [CW-13423/2023] 6. Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner so also the averments made in this petition and the observations of the Court, as stated above, the Court is of the opinion that the present writ petition deserves to be allowed and the petitioner be allowed premature encashment of the FDRs which are in her name. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed by allowing the application in toto filed by the petitioner for premature encashment of the FDRs in her name and the order dated 13.01.2026 passed by the MACT is modified by allowing the petitioner to get premature encashment of all the FDRs and receive the amount alongwith interest which accrued upon the aforesaid FDRs. 8. Learned MACT shall forthwith release the FDRs laying with the State Bank of India in the name of the petitioner after ascertaining her identity and the amount to be released shall be credited in the petitioner's savings bank account. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Gaurav Srivastava /185