No One Can Question A Person On How He Will Use Awarded Amount: Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Union To Release Compensation Invested in FDR

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has reiterated that the authorities cannot question a major person of sound mind that how will he use the compensation awarded.

Justice Vikas Bahl said, “The money to which he is found entitled is to be handed over to him without placing any riders thereon and that once the compensation has been awarded, the same would go to the claimant, as no one can question a major person of sound mind as to how he would put the said money to use.“

Reliance was placed on the High Court's decision in Rani and others vs. Union of India, [CR-243-202] to underscore that, “once compensation amount is awarded by the court, it should go to the claimant. No one can question a major person of sound mind entitled to an adjudicated amount of compensation in an award which has become final, suspecting how the money would be put to use by the rightful owner. This is not the business of the Tribunal.”

These observations were made while hearing the two pleas seeking releasing of compensation granted by Railway Tribunal. In one case petitioners were awarded an amount of Rs.8 lakhs along with simple interest @ 9% per annum from the date of the incident till the date of the order in equal share on account of death of their son.

It was submitted that however, with respect to disbursement of the said amount, it was observed that the petitioners would be permitted to withdraw 10% of the share of the awarded amount and the rest amount of their respective share was ordered to be invested in a nationalized bank in FDR for three years and the proportionate interest accrued upon the FDR shall be paid to these applicants.

The plea stated that petitioners had moved an application for releasing the amount of compensation ordered to be kept in FDR by stating that their house was very old and in a pathetic condition and the same was required to be constructed with concrete material so that the same could be made fit for living.

It was further averred that the same was not fit and safe for living of human beings. It was argued that however, the Railway Claims Tribunal rejected the application.

After examining the submissions, the Court noted that in Santra & Ors. vs. Union of India” and other connected matters, the High Court observed that the Tribunal ought not to have put clog over the rights of the claimants and that they should have unfettered right to use the money.

In the present case, Justice Bahl opined that the petitioners have specifically mentioned in the application the facts as regards their need for the release of the money which apparently is genuine and bona fide.

In the light of the above, the Court directed the Railway Claims Tribunal, to issue directions to the concerned Branch Manager for releasing the entire amount of compensation along with interest to the petitioners in the same proportion as per the award.

Mr. Upender Prashar, Advocate for the petitioners (in both petitions).

Mr. Narender Kumar, Senior Panel Counsel for the respondent-UOI (in both petitions).

Title: Jageshwar and another v. UOI & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 416

Click here to read/download the order