1 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3995/2005 IN FIRST APPEAL St. NO.19367/2005 United India Insurance Co.Ltd.. ..Applicant -VERSUS- Arun Parshuram Kulkarni and another. ..Respondents ......... Mr.S.G.Deshpande, Advocate for the applicant/Insurance Company. Mr.C.M.Lokesh i/b G.S.Hegde & Associates, for the respondent No.1. .......... CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2487/2006 IN FIRST APPEAL St. NO.11065/2006 Arun Parshuram Kulkarni. ..Applicant -VERSUS- Jaimal Singh Charan Singh and another. ..Respondents ......... Mr.C.M.Lokesh i/b G.S.Hegde & Associates, for the applicant. Mr.S.G.Deshpande, Advocate for the respondent No.2/Insurance Company .......... 2 CORAM : A.P.DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 17th MARCH, 2009. P.C. : 1. Civil Application No.3995/2005 is moved by the appellant/United India Insurance Company seeking condonation of delay of 38 days in filing the first appeal challenging the award passed by the M.A.C.T. whereas Civil Application No.2487/2006 is filed by the claimant yet again praying for condonation of delay in filing the cross objection. There is delay of 280 days in filing the cross- objection. 2. Perused both the applications. For the reasons stated therein, in the interest of justice, the applications are allowed. The delay in filing the appeal and so also the cross-objection is condoned. Both the applications are disposed of. 3. The appeal and cross-objection stand admitted. JUDGE 3 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1148/2009 IN FIRST APPEAL St. NO.19367/2005 Arun Parshuram Kulkarni. ..Applicant -VERSUS- United India Insurance and another. ..Respondents ......... Mr.C.M.Lokesh i/b G.S.Hegde & Associates, for the applicant. Mr.S.G.Deshpande, Advocate for the respondent No.1/Insurance Company .......... CORAM : A.P.DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 17th MARCH, 2009. P.C. : 1. The present application is moved by the respondent No.1 (original claimant before the M.A.C.T.). The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.2,67,000/- together with interest. The entire amount is said to have been deposited by the appellant/Insurance Company. By the present application, a prayer for withdrawal of the amount is made. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company in all fairness submits that the award of 20% of the compensation has not even been challenged in the appeal. Thus, the applicant would be 4 permitted to withdraw sum of Rs.50,000/- without furnishing any security. In regard to the amount to be paid over and above Rs.50,000/-, the learned counsel for the appellant insists for security. 3. Having regard to the totality of facts and circumstances, I pass the following order:- “The applicant is permitted to withdraw sum of Rs.50,000/- without furnishing security. The applicant is also permitted to withdraw sum of Rs.1,00,000/- on furnishing security to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.” 4. The application is disposed of. JUDGE