IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2009 / 2ND MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 32778 of 2008(B) -------------------------- OPMV.315/2006 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... PETITIONER: -------------- T.A.VIJAYAN, THIRUVANMOOLAYIL HOUSE, MEMURI P.O., MANJOOR. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI SRI.B.BIPIN RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. SHAJI, AZHIYATHU HOUSE, NEAR THALIKKALLU AYARKUNNAM. 2. BOBBY JOSEPH, VALLIKKATTIL HOUSE, VALLIKKATTU, ETTUMANOOR. 3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., KOTTAYAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C).No. 32778 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT The challenge in this writ petition is against the order Ext.P4 order, dated 25th October 2008, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kottayam in IA No.4070/08 in OP(MV) No.315/06. 2. Petitioner was the claimant and Ext.P1 award was passed allowing a compensation of Rs.1,70,500/- with interest and permitting disbursal of only Rs.50,000/-. The balance amount is in deposit. The petitioner filed Ext.P2 praying for releasing the amount in deposit. The reason stated in Ext.P3 is that by Ext.P2 agreement he has agreed to purchase certain property and that to raise the consideration for the same he needs the amounts in deposit. On that application Ext.P4 order has been passed permitting him to withdraw only Rs.1,00,000/-It is this order under challenge in this writ petition. 3. A reading of the order shows that the Tribunal has not found that Ext.P2 agreement of sale is not a genuine document. If that be so, if the petitioner has given a proper reason for utilising the amounts available in deposit, there is no reason why the Tribunal should not have allowed the request. Therefore, I cannot uphold the W.P.C.No. 32778 OF 2008 -:2:- view taken by the Tribunal restricting the withdrawal to only Rs.1,00,000/-. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Tribunal to permit the petitioner to withdraw the entire amount available in his deposit. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) ttb