1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.1937 OF 2009 Vijay s/o Chatrabhuj Sawant, Age-19 years, Occu:Labour, R/o-Pimpala Dhavguda, Tq-Ambajogai, Dist-Beed. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Solapur, Branch Solapur, Tq. & Dist-Solapur. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Mr.T.G. Gaikwad Advocate for Petitioner. ... CORAM: K.K. TATED, J. DATE : 30TH JULY, 2009. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner. Office note shows that notice issued to Respondent is not yet served. It is not necessary to wait for service on the Respondent in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 2 2. By this Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, Petitioner is challenging the order dated 17th January, 2009 passed by the Member of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Beed in Motor Accident Claim No.131 of 1992 and Misc. Civil Application (N) R.J.E. NO.7 of 2009. 3. It is the case of the Petitioner that they preferred Claim Petition No.131 of 1992 and same was settled in Lok Nyayalaya. In Lok Nyayalaya the Respondent Insurance Company agreed to pay a lump-sum amount of Rs.90,000/-. Thereafter on 8th September, 2004 an amount of Rs. 30,000/- and on 14th October, 2004 an amount of Rs. 25,000/- deposited in fixed deposit with State Bank of Hyderabad, Ambajogai Branch in the name of Petitioner for five years and five months. At that time the Petitioner was minor and therefore the Tribunal directed to deposit the said amount in fixed deposit. After attaining the age of majority, the Petitioner filed Misc. Civil Application (N) R.J.E. NO.7 of 2009 for withdrawal of the said amount along with accrued interest. On that application, the Tribunal passed order 3 on 17th January, 2009 as follows: "There is no urgency to pay the amount. Let it be invested further for five years." 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Tribunal has not given any reason for rejecting the Petitioner's application for withdrawal of the said amount. 5. In any case, now the Petitioner has become major and he is entitled to withdraw the amount. Considering these facts, Writ Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (B) and (C) which read as under: "(B) The Hon'ble High Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the order dated 17.1.2009 passed by the Ld. Member, M.A.C.T. Beed in Application dated 5.1.2009. (C) This Hon'ble High Court may be pleased to grant permission to the petitioner to withdraw the amount with interest kept in fixed deposit as per Hon'ble Tribunal order in M.A.C.P. No. 4 131/1992 which is deposited by the respondent in the name of petitioner bearing S.T.D.R. No.0833916 dated 8.9.2004 and S.T.D.R. No.0833988 dated 14.10.2004 in the State Bank of Hyderabad Branch Ambajogai, Dist-Beed." [K.K. TATED, J.] asb/JULY09/wp1937.09