High CourtsDivision Bench

Pavitra Shivling Doifode and Others vs Nathuram K. Maral and Another

Bombay High Court · Decided on 26 June 1987 · Citation: (1989) ACJ 184

HON’BLE JUDGES
P.B. Sawant, J · G.H. Guttal, J
CASE NUMBER
F.A. No. 122 of 1987

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

2 paragraphs · 122 words

P.B. Sawant and G.H. Guttal, JJ.—Appeal allowed to be withdrawn. Refund of court fees as per the rules.

2.

It has, however, become necessary to observe that the Tribunals should not direct amounts due to the claimants, who are major, to be invested in fixed deposits or otherwise indiscriminately and as a matter of rule. It appears that directions are at present given by the Tribunals invariably in all cases to invest the amounts without application of mind to the facts of each case causing hardship to the claimants who are in need of immediate succour. We hope and trust that the Tribunals hereafter will give such direction only after hearing the parties and substantiate them by giving reason in each case.