1 13.wp8614.11 ast IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8614 OF 2011 Mr. Pandurang @ Vijay Shamrao Jadhav. ....Petitioner Vs. Manager, Bharat Dairy Krushnapuri & ors. ....Respondents Mr. Vijay S. Gharat, Advocate for Petitioner. CORAM:- GIRISH GODBOLE, J DATED:- NOVEMBER 16, 2011 P.C. 1. Heard Mr. Gharat, Advocate for Petitioner. 2. In view of the peculiar facts of this case, the Writ Petition is being disposed of without issuing notice to the Respondents. The Petitioner is original claimant in M.A.C.P. No. 403 of 2004 filed in the District Court at Satara. Since he was injured in an accident of a motor vehicle the learned Ad-hoc District Judge-5, Satara allowed the claim by Judgment and Order dated 17/11/2006 and a total compensation of Rs. 2,78,700/- (including the amount of Rs. 25,000/- by way of no fault liability) was awarded with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of 2 13.wp8614.11 Petition till realisation. It was further directed that on realisation, amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- be kept in fixed deposit in the name of the Petitioner for 6 years and remaining amount be paid to him. None of the parties challenged this order and the order has attained finality. 3. Mr. Gharat has tendered an affidavit of the Petitioner indicating that no appeal has been filed in this Court against the said Judgment. Since the Petitioner requires a sum of Rs. 50,000/- for undergoing operation of his shoulder, an Application was made in the Trial Court being M.A.C.P.(N.R.J.E.) No. 26 of 2011. That has been dismissed by the Trial Court by impugned Judgment and Order dated 6/7/2011. The Petitioner has produced a certificate of the concerned doctor that he is required to undergo surgery. 4. When the main claim petition was decided, the Petitioner was major and one fails to understand the logic behind keeping the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- in fixed deposit. Be that as it may, the sum of Rs. 1 Lakh is actually kept in fixed deposit and the said deposit is due to mature on 13/1/2013. The Petitioner cannot be made to wait for more than one year if he is required to undergo operation. In his affidavit, he has specifically 3 13.wp8614.11 stated the reason for withdrawal. In view of this, in my opinion, the interests of justice would be met if the Petitioner is permitted to withdraw sum of Rs. 50,000/- from the Central Bank of India, Satara branch out of the sum of Rs. 1 Lakh, which has been deposited vide FDR in Account No. 255. The balance amount will be continued to be invested in the Bank and on maturity of the Fixed Deposit i.e. on 13/1/2013, the Petitioner will get balance amount and the accrued interest. 5. Writ Petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs. (GIRISH GODBOLE, J)