Kerala High Court
T.M.Muhammed Anwar vs M.A.C.T Perumbavoor on 14 February, 2008
Author: Antony Dominic
Bench: Antony Dominic
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 5263 of 2008(B)
1. T.M.MUHAMMED ANWAR,S/O.T.S.MUHAMMEDKUTTY
... Petitioner
2. THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
Vs
1. M.A.C.T PERUMBAVOOR
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.M.M.SAIDU MUHAMMED
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :14/02/2008
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
===============
W.P.(C) NO. 5263 OF 2008 B
====================
Dated this the 14th day of February, 2008
J U D G M E N T
By Ext.P1 award, an amount of Rs.3,50,000/- was awarded by the MACT, Perumbavoor. It is stated by the petitioner that presently Rs.2,12,627/- ordered to be deposited in Bank is available in the Bank. Subsequently, the petitioner filed Ext.P3 IA 6066/07, praying for permitting him to withdraw the amount in deposit. It is stated by the petitioner that by order dated 29.1.2008, the Tribunal allowed the petitioner to withdraw Rs.1 lakh from the Fixed Deposit. It is aggrieved by the order restricting withdrawal to Rs.1 lakh, this writ petition is filed.
2. Ext.P3 is the IA that was filed by the petitioner. A reading of Ext.P3 shows that dire needs of the petitioner includes his own liabilities and the requirement of substantial amounts towards treatment of his child have been stated in the application. It is despite giving all these reasons, I notice that WPC 5263/08 :2 : the Tribunal has passed a laconic order restricting payment to Rs.1 lakh. In my view, Tribunal has not adverted to the reasons urged by the petitioner in Ext.P3 and had it been done, I see no justification for declining permission to the petitioner to withdraw the amount.
3. Accordingly, I direct that the petitioner will be permitted to withdraw the amount as prayed for in IA 6066/2007.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE.
Rp