IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4229 of 2009 Petition under Section ____ of CPC., to revise/against the order dated ______ in NO : of 0 on the file of the court of the Between: S.M.Manaz, S/o. Sri S.Moulana, R/o. Jai Nagar Colony, Chittoor. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 S.Abdul Rafi, S/o. Sri S.Rahim, R/o. D.No. 15-1678, Lal Garden Chittoor. 2 The Branch Manager, The National Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office, Chittoor. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.N.V.SUMANTH Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/CRP{GMS} THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4229 of 2009 ORDER: The OP filed by the petitioner in MVOP.145/2004 on the file of the District Judge-cum-Chairman, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chittoor was partly allowed awarding compensation of Rs.1,43,508/- along with proportionate costs and interest at 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the petition i.e. from 20.04.2004 till the date of deposit by the respondents and the petitioner was permitted to withdraw Rs.50,000/- out of the said amount. Thereafter the petitioner filed I.A.482/2009 seeking permission to withdraw the remaining balance amount of Rs.93,508/- which was kept in the Court deposit on the ground that he is in need of money for further treatment and also to perform marriage of his sister which is said to have been fixed. It is further stated that he is working as Panchayat Secretary and is a literate person and therefore, the amount is sought to be withdrawn for the useful purpose alone. The said petition was dismissed on the ground that no valid reasons have been given in the affidavit for permitting withdrawal of the balance amount and the time fixed in the award was not expired. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in need of money for further treatment and also for performing marriage of his sister. Even assuming that the statement made by the petitioner that he had sister and that her marriage was fixed is incorrect, it is stated that the petitioner was in need of money for further treatment. No particulars about the further treatment and Doctor’s advice have been filed. However, the petitioner being literate person and working as Panchayat Secretary, it cannot be said that if the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the balance amount it will be misused in any way. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is permitted to withdraw half of the amount under deposit and the remaining amount shall not be allowed to be withdrawn until expiry of the period, as fixed in the main M.V.O.P.145/2004. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly disposed of. ___________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Dated: 11.09.2009 Dsr