GANESAN Vs. RATHINAMBAL; THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD REP BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER; MURALI AND; THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The advocates are absenting themselves from attending the Court. Admit.

(2.) Perused the grounds of revision and also the impugned order passed in I.A. No. 847 of 2008 in M.C.O.P. No. 126 of 2005 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/ Principal Subordinate Judge, Myladuthurai. The said application was filed by the claimant for withdrawal of the entire award amount inclusive of interest which is in the deposit of the Nationalised Bank as per the orders of the Tribunal. A reading of the affidavit in I.A. No. 847 of 2008 in M.C.O.P. No. 126 of 2005 will go to show that in the ill fated motor accident which took place on 25.2.2005, right leg of the claimant was amputated from Thigh Region and that in the surgery, he had incurred a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- to meet the medical expenses and that since he could not do any job due to amputation of right leg, he intend to start a grocery shop for which he required the entire award amount inclusive of interest to the tune of Rs. 6,76,028/- which is in the fixed deposit of a Nationalised Bank as per the orders of the Tribunal. In the said application, respondents 1,2 and 4 have endorsed ' no objection' and the third respondent remained exparte. The learned Tribunal, after going through the affidavit, had allowed the said application in part permitting the petitioner to withdraw only a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- without assigning any reason for rejecting the balance of the claim. The two reasonings stated in the affidavit to the petition for claimining the entire award amount inclusive of interest amounting to Rs. 6,76,028/- by the claimant are (1) to meet the medical expenses, he had incurred for the surgery,he had undergone at Pondicherry JIMPER Hospital, after raising a loan of Rs. 3,00,000/- and (2) since he had lost right leg after the accident, he could not continue the previous avocation of load man, he intended to start a grocery shop for which he required investment. The fact remains that after amputation of his right leg, he cannot do any other job as that of the previous one. The grocery shop is an ideal business for him at this stage. But in case, if he faces loss in the profession, then it will be very difficult for him to see both ends meet. So I am of the view that atleast, if a sum of Rs. 2,76,028/- is allowed to be in the deposit for three years, the interest derived from the said fixed deposit amount will be of some use to him even if he starts a grocery shop.

(3.) In fine, this civill revision petition is allowed and the order passed in IA. No. 847 of 2008 in M.C.O.P. No. 126 of 2005 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/ Principal Subordinate Judge, Mayiladuthurai, dated 10.12.2008 is modified and the petitioner is permitted to withdraw Rs. 4,00,000/- only from out of Rs. 6,76,028/- which is in the Bank deposit to the credit of M.C.O.P. No. 126 of 2005 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Principal Subordinate Judge, Mayiladuthurai without furnishing any security.