(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 5101 OF 2009 1. Bhagwan s/o. Kisanrao Dete, Age : 62 years, Occupation : Agriculture. 2. Laxmibai w/o. Bhagwanrao Dete, Age : 55 years, Occupation : Household. Both R/o. Rui (Dhoki), Taluka & District : Osmanabad. .. Petitioners. versus 1. The New India Assurance Company Ltd., Branch Neharu Nagar, Jalgaon, Through its Divisional Manager, The New India Assurance Company Ltd., Divisional Office, Hutatma Smruti Mandir, Complex, Solapur. 2. Ulka w/o. Ravindra Dete, Age : 29 years, Occupation : Household, R/o. Prasad Colony, Osmanabad, Taluka & District : Osmanabad. 3. Vikrant s/o. Ravindra Dete, Age : 9 years, Minor, U/G. his real mother, Respondent no.2. .. Respondents. (2) .......................... Mr. B.S. Shinde, Advocate, holding for Mr. E.S. Murge, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. A.S. Usmanpurkar, Advocate, holding for Mr. K.V. Kulkarni, Advocate, for respondent no.1. Mr. V.B. Deshmukh, Advocate, for respondent nos.2 and 3. .......................... CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. DATE : 15TH DECEMBER 2009. COURT'S ORDER : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent. 2. By way of present petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 22nd June 2009, passed by the learned Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Osmanabad, in Day Petition No. 35/2009, filed in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 255/2002, thereby rejecting the application filed by the present petitioner and the respondent nos.2 and 3 for withdrawal of the amount. 3. Since the son of the present petitioner, who is husband of respondent no.2 and father of respondent no.3, had died in an accident, a (3) claim petition came to be filed by the present petitioners and the respondent nos.3 and 4. An award came to be passed on 7th May 2008 in the said claim petition. In the said award, apportionment of share of all the claimants has been given. In so far as the share of respondent no.3, who is a minor, has been directed to be deposited in a nationalized Bank. The petitioner and the respondent nos.2 and 3 had jointly filed an application for withdrawal of the amount falling to their respective shares as per the award. The said application is rejected on the ground that the matter is pending before this court. Hence, the present petition. 4. Mr. B.S. Shinde, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, submits that it is only the claimants who have filed appeal before this court and not the Insurance Company. He, therefore, submits that the learned Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal has erred in rejecting the application. 5. Mr. A.S. Usmanpurkar, learned Counsel appearing for respondent no.1, vehemently opposes the application. 6. Admittedly, the Insurance Company has not preferred any appeal before this court. It is only the claimants who have approached this court for enhancement of compensation. In that view of the matter, I find that the learned Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal was not justified in rejecting the application. 7. Hence, the petition is allowed. (4) The order dated 22nd June 2009, passed by the learned Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Osmanabad, in Day Petition No. 35/2009, filed in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 255/2002, is quashed and set aside. The application for withdrawal of the amount, on behalf of the present petitioners and the respondent no.2, is allowed. It is made clear that in so far as amount of respondent no.3 is concerned, the same shall be deposited in a nationalized Bank, as directed in the award. 8. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. There shall be no order as to costs. ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp5101