SUSHAMA Vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P2 order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ottappalam, dismissing her application for premature release of the amount remaining in Fixed Deposit. The amount has been directed to be kept in Fixed Deposit as per orders of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. According to the petitioner, she is a widow, who has no income to maintain herself and therefore seeks the issue of appropriate orders releasing the Fixed Deposit amount to her. A perusal of Ext.P2 order shows that the said order has been passed for the reason that the application made by the petitioner did not disclose sufficient grounds to justify the premature release of the amount remaining in Fixed Deposit. A copy of the petition filed before the Tribunal is not produced in these proceedings. Since the application of the petitioner has been dismissed for the reason that she had not made out sufficient grounds for such release in the petition filed by her, I am not inclined to interfere with Ext.P2. It is sufficient that the petitioner is given the liberty to file a fresh petition before the Tribunal, setting out the grounds on which she seeks premature release of the Fixed Deposit, supported by necessary evidence, so as to convince the Tribunal of her need. This Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ottappalam, seeking premature release of the Fixed Deposit amount, setting out proper grounds supported by necessary evidence so as to convince the Tribunal of her need.