IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 30TH JANUARY 2009 / 10TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3137 of 2009(W) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- SUNNY, AGED 58 YEARS,S/O. ABRAHAM, CHENKATTIL HOUSE, THIRUVANIYOOR, PUTHENCRUZ. BY ADV. SRI.E.C.POULOSE SMT.BOBBY RAPHEAL.C RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- M/S UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, BRANCH OFFICE III, SHARANYA, HOSPITAL ROAD, COCHIN 682 011. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 3137 OF 2009 (W) ==================== Dated this the 30th day of January, 2009 J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P3 order passed by MACT, Perumbavoor in IA No.6336/08 in OP(MV) No.288/03. It would appear that the petitioner was the victim of an accident and claiming compensation, he filed the OP(MV) before the Tribunal. Award was passed on 27/11/2007 and the substantial portion was ordered to be kept in deposit. 2. While the amount continues in deposit, the petitioner filed Ext.P2 application praying to release the amount in deposit. In Ext.P2, the reason stated by the petitioner justifying his request is the liability that the petitioner incurred in connection with the marriage of his daughter solemnized in October, 2006. He has also stated that he had incurred huge expenditure for his medical treatment. However, the Tribunal for the only reason that the liability in connection with the marriage was incurred way back in 2006, and therefore the petitioner could not prove his requirement, rejected the application. 3. In my view, the fact that the liability was incurred in 2006, by itself, does not mean that the petitioner is no longer in need of money. WPC 3137/09 :2 : When a person seeks release of deposit in his name, I do not think that there is warrant for any such technical approach. I am inclined to think that the petitioner's explanation justifying his request for premature release is worth acceptance. For that reason, I set aside Ext.P3 and direct that the Tribunal shall allow the withdrawal of the amount as prayed for. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp