IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 13TH JANUARY 2009 / 23RD POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 1242 of 2009(W) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- VISHNU NAMBOODIRI A.V., @ VISHNU, A.V. S/O. VASUDEVAN NAMBOODIRI, AGED 49 YEARS, EDAKKATTU ILLOM, KANAZHA DESOM AND VILLAGE, CHANGANASSERI TALUK, KOTTAYAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, TRIPUNITHURA BRANCH, P.B. NO. 48, MARKET JUNCTION THRIPUNITHURA P.O., ERNAKULAM 682 301. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. ----------------------- W.P.(C).No. 1242 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of January, 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioner was the claimant in O.P(MV).No.288/97 on the file of the MACT, Ernakulam. By Ext.P1 award, compensation of Rs.1,44,500/- with interest thereon was awarded. However, he was permitted only to withdraw an amount of Rs.25,000/- and balance was ordered to be deposited in a Nationalized Bank in fixed deposit. Petitioner states that subsequent to the award he lost his employment. While the amount remitted by the respondent in the MACT was remaining in deposit as ordered in the award, petitioner filed I.A.No.900/08, requesting the Tribunal to release the amount deposited in the fixed deposit. Going by the affidavit, an amount of Rs.2,40,446/- is still available in deposit. Petitioner states that for his WP(c).No.1242/2009 2 treatment he had incurred heavy expenditure and had borrowed funds from several of his friends and neighbors. It is stated that he has to repay the liability so incurred. It is also stated in the affidavit that as he lost his job he has to start some business to generate income to maintain his family. Stating these reasons though he sought release of the amount in deposit, the Tribunal passed Ext.P4 order, releasing R.1 lakh and rejecting his request for releasing the entire amount. It is this order which is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. A reading of Ext.P4 shows that according to the Tribunal the reasons stated were not bona fide. However, no reason is stated in the order to justify such conclusion. On the other hand a reading of the affidavit given an impression that the petitioner genuinely needs the amount released. In such circumstances, I seen no reason why the petitioner should not be allowed to enjoy the benefit of the amount available in deposit. Therefore I am not in a position to uphold Ext.P4 to the extent, the request of the petitioner to release the full WP(c).No.1242/2009 3 amount in deposit is turned down. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the tribunal to release the balance amount now available in deposit of the petitioner. Writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WP(c).No.1242/2009 4