Logo
Court Book - India Code App - Play Store

advertisement

Supreme Court Rejects Widow’s Plea on Compensation Delay, Says She Accepted Cheque Without Protest

Vivek G.

Supreme Court Rejects Widow’s Plea on Compensation Delay, Says She Accepted Cheque Without Protest

In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by Urmila Chand, who had challenged the disbursement of motor accident compensation. The court held that she had already accepted her share knowingly and could not later claim fraud or unfairness.

हिंदी में पढ़ें

Background

The case dates back to 2009, when Priyank Chand lost his life in a road accident involving a truck and a car near Tinsukia, Assam. His mother, widow, and two minor children filed a claim before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, which awarded ₹11.82 lakh as compensation.

Read also: Punjab and Haryana High Court allows ED to inspect foreign asset records in Amarinder and

In 2015, the Tribunal disbursed the money: ₹1 lakh to Urmila Chand (the mother), ₹6.26 lakh to her daughter-in-law, and ₹3 lakh each kept in fixed deposit for the two minor children. Urmila signed the order sheet and encashed the cheque. But later, she filed a review petition alleging that the distribution was unfair and that she deserved a larger share. The Tribunal dismissed her review petition, citing a delay of over six months. The Gauhati High Court upheld this order in 2021.

Hearing her final appeal, a bench led by Justice N.V. Anjaria noted that Urmila had willingly signed the joint petition for disbursement in 2015 and had taken the cheque without raising any protest. “When the petitioner had signed the order sheet and received a cheque for ₹1 lakh, she is deemed to know the contents of the order,” the bench observed.

Read also: Delhi High Court Directs Pensioner Husband to Pay Enhanced Maintenance to Wife

The judges also remarked that her reliance on health issues and dissatisfaction with her lawyers could not justify the delay. The High Court’s earlier finding that her subsequent actions appeared like “a ploy to create a story” was also endorsed.

Decision

The Supreme Court concluded that Urmila Chand’s conduct showed conscious acceptance of her share, and she could not later “approbate and reprobate.” Finding no merit in her claims, the bench dismissed the appeal on September 3, 2025, bringing an end to the long-drawn litigation.

Case Title: Urmila Chand vs. Sonu Chand & Others

Date: September 3, 2025

Advertisment