Orissa High Court
Case Details
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 07-Nov-2025 19:20:18 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 24286 of 2025 (In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950). Sudam Behera & Anr. …. Petitioner (s) -versus- State of Odisha & Anr. …. Opposite Party (s) Advocates appeared in the case through Hybrid Mode: For Petitioner(s) For Opposite Party (s) : : Mr. Bijaya Kumar Parida-2, Adv. Along with Associates Smt. Sarita Moharana, ASC CORAM: DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI DATE OF HEARING:-08.09.2025 DATE OF JUDGMENT:-31.10.2025 Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi, J. 1. The Petitioners, through the present Writ Petition filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, seek to assail the Order dated 20.05.2025 passed by the Learned 1st Additional District Judge-Cum-1st Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cuttack in MAC No. 1129 of 2020, whereby the prayer of the Petitioner for premature withdrawal of the entire fixed deposit amount was allowed in part. The Petitioner further prays for a direction permitting premature withdrawal of the entire fixed deposit amount to meet the educational expenses pertaining to the higher studies of her daughter. I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE:
Legal Reasoning
2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: Page 1 of 12 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 07-Nov-2025 19:20:18 (i) The Petitioner, being the parents of their deceased, who unfortunately lost his life in a motor vehicle accident, instituted a claim before the Learned Tribunal seeking just compensation under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which was registered as M.A.C No. 1129 of 2020.
Decision
(ii) Thereafter, the said M.A.C Case was adjudicated and disposed of by the Learned Tribunal, whereby compensation was awarded in favour of the Petitioners. The Learned Court below, while disbursing the awarded amount, directed that a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Only) be kept in (cid:281)xed deposit in the name of the Petitioners for a period of 5 years in any Nationalized Bank, with liberty to draw the accrued interest periodically. (iii) Subsequently, the daughter of the Petitioners was selected for pursuning higher study in Air Hostess at the Frankfinn Institute. In view of the financial requirement for her admission and course fees, the Petitioner filed an application before the Learned Court below seeking permission for premature withdrawal of the fixed deposit amount standing in their name, for the limited purpose of meeting the educational expenses of their daughter. (iv) Thereafter, by order dated on 20.08.2025, the Learned Court below partly allowed the said application, permitting the Petitioners to withdraw a portion of the fixed deposit amount directing that the balance sum shall continue to remain in fixed deposit in their names for the remaining period as originally stipulated. Page 2 of 12 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 07-Nov-2025 19:20:18 Aggrieved by the said rejection, the Petitioner has preferred the present Writ Petition. II. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS: 3. The learned counsel for the Petitioners respectfully and earnestly made the following submissions in support of his contentions: (i) The Petitioners have assailed the impugned order dated 20.05.2025, passed by the Learned Learned 1st Additional District Judge-Cum-1st Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cuttack in MAC No. 1129 of 2020, on the ground that the said order suffers from legal infirmity and procedural irregularity, warranting interference by this Court in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. (ii) By the impugned order dated 20.05.2020, the Learned Court below rejected the Petitioner’s prayer for the premature withdrawal of the entire (cid:281)xed deposit amount, holding that only partial withdrawal could be permi(cid:308)ed in accordance with the directions earlier issues at the time of disbursement of the award amount. (iii) It is contended that the son of the Petitioners unfortunately succumbed to injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident, and thereafter, the Petitioners, being the parents and legal representatives of the deceased, (cid:281)led a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal seeking just compensation under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. (iv) Thereafter, the Tribunal, upon adjudication of the claim, awarded compensation in favour of the Petitioners and, while directing Page 3 of 12 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 07-Nov-2025 19:20:18 disbursement of the award sum, further ordered that an amount of Rs 3,00,000/- be kept in (cid:281)xed deposit in the name of the Petitioner for a period of 5years in any nationalized bank, with liberty to draw the interest accrued thereon periodically. (v) It is further submi(cid:308)ed that the daughter of the Petitioners, upon successful completion of her +2 Science, was subsequently selected for her higher studies in the Air Hostess Training at the Frank(cid:281)nn Institute. In absence of any other viable (cid:281)nancial source to meet the requisite admission and course expenses, the Petitioners approached the Learned Court below by (cid:281)ling an application seeking permission for premature withdrawal of the (cid:281)xed deposit amount, speci(cid:281)cally for the purpose of facilitating their daughter’s admission to the said course. (vi) By order dated 20.08.2025, the Learned Court below, partly allowed the Petitioners’ application, permi(cid:308)ing withdrawal of a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- from (cid:281)xed deposit and directing the concerned Bank to release the said amount in favour of the Petitioners. The Learned Court further directed the balance amount shall continue to remain in (cid:281)xed deposit in their names for the remaining period, in accordance with the terms and conditions earlier imposed at the time of disbursement of the award amount. (vii) In this juncture the Petitioners have approached this Hon’ble Court, seeking a direction for release of the entire (cid:281)xed deposit amount along with the accrued interest, contending that such withdrawal is essential to meet the educational expenses of their daughter. It is Page 4 of 12 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 07-Nov-2025 19:20:18 urged that, unless the permission for full withdrawal is granted, the Petitioners would su(cid:283)er serious (cid:281)nancial hardship and their daughter’s admission to the said institute would be adversely a(cid:283)ected, thereby causing them grave prejudice. III. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTIES: 4. The Opposite Party contend that the present Writ Petition is not maintainable before this Hon’ble Court as to be rejected in limine. (i) The Opposite Party submits that the present Petitioners have prayed for release of the entire amount i.e. Rs. 3,00,00/-, which stands jointly deposited in Union Bank of India, Cu(cid:308)ack together with the interest accrued thereon in their favour. (ii) Upon query by the Court, both the Petitioners submi(cid:308)ed that their daughter, Ms. Anusatya Behera, has been selected for higher studies in Air Hostess Training at Franklin Institute. It was further stated that the Petitioners have no independent source of income or savings for release of the (cid:281)xed deposit amount standing in their names to facilitate their daughter’s admission. (iii) The Opposite Party further contends that, upon perusal of the case record, it was that a sum of Rs 3,00,000/- had been jointly kept in the names of the Petitioners in the form of (cid:281)xed deposit in the bank in the concerned bank pursuant to the earlier order of the Learned Tribunal. (iv) The Opposite Party strenuously urged that the order dated 27.09.2024 was rightly passed by the Learned Court below, Page 5 of 12 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 07-Nov-2025 19:20:18 wherein, upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the (cid:281)nancial need of the Petitioners, the concerned Bank manager was directed to release a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- only jointly in favour of the Petitioners, while the balance amount was directed to remain in (cid:281)xed deposit in their names for the remaining period, in accordance with the terms and conditions earlier imposed at the time of disbursement of the compensation. (v) The Learned Court below placed reliance upon the decision in Dibakar Pradhan & Anr v. Iswar Chandra Majhi & Ors1, wherein it was held that, in ma(cid:308)ers relating to disbursement of compensation, the Tribunal is duty-bound to ensure that the awarded amount is appropriately invested, so as to safeguard the corpus from being fri(cid:308)ered away by the bene(cid:281)ciaries due to ignorance, illiteracy or vulnerability to exploitation. (vi) Being aggrieved by the aforesaid decision of the Learned Court below, the Petitioners have approached this Court invoking its Writ Jurisdiction under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking appropriate relief and modi(cid:281)cation of the impugned order to permit premature withdrawal of the entire (cid:281)xed deposit amount. IV. COURT’S REASONING AND ANALYSIS: 5. Heard Learned Counsel for parties and perused the documents placed before this Court. 1 (2014) 118 CLT 968 Page 6 of 12 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 07-Nov-2025 19:20:18 6. In light of the forgoing facts, the Court observes that the assessment of compensation, though inherently involving a decree of hypothetical consideration, must nonetheless be grounded in objectively and rational evaluation. The principles of justice and justness in adjudication emanate from the equality of treatment, consistency in approach, and fairness and uniformity in the decision-making process. A judicial determination, to command legitimacy, must therefore re(cid:282)ect reasoned discretion, balanced appreciation of evidence, and adherence to establish legal norms. 7. This Court has placed reliance upon the decision in A.V. Padma & Ors v. R. Venugopal & Ors2, wherein it was emphatically held that the Tribunal, while adjudicating claims under the Motor Vehicle Act, must extend thoughtful and judicious considerations to the genuine needs and circumstances of the claimants, rather than adopting a mechanical or perfunctory approach. The Spirit and object of the legislation being bene(cid:281)cial and compensatory in nature, the adajudicatory process should be informed by equity and pragmatic appreciation of the realities confronting the victims or their dependents. 8. Adverting to the seminal pronouncement of the Supreme Court’s decision in General Manager, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, Trivandrum v. Susamma Thomas & Ors3, while a(cid:284)rming the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in Muljibi Ajarambhai Harijan v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.4, enunciated certain guiding