JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Petitioner has preferred this writ petition challenging impugned order dated 17.05.2011 passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Dausa (for short 'the Tribunal'), whereby his application for premature payment of the Fixed Deposits has been dismissed. 3. The Tribunal vide its award dated 20.07.2009 awarded a sum of Rs. 70,150/- in favour of the petitioner and out of that amount, entire amount has been paid to the petitioner, except sum of Rs. 26,991/- and Rs. 10,000/-, which were ordered to be deposited in Fixed Deposit vide award passed by the Tribunal. Learned counsel for the petitioner moved an application before the Tribunal for premature payment of the Fixed Deposits on the ground that he is going to marry on 17.05.2011, therefore, he will require money to incur expenses for the said purpose. Learned Tribunal vide its order dated 17.05.2011 rejected the said application. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner took a loan to incur expenses for the purpose of his marriage, therefore, he needs money and aforesaid Fixed Deposits may be ordered to be en-cashed. Photostat copies of the Fixed Deposits have been placed on record. One Fixed Deposit of Rs. 10,000/- is going to mature on 12.11.2011 and another Fixed Deposits will be matured on 01.10.2012. Since, approximately 50% of the amount of the award has already been paid to the petitioner and further Rs. 10,000/-, he is going to get on 12.11.2011, therefore, I do not find any justified reason to pass any order for premature payment of the aforesaid Fixed Deposits. 5. In view of above discussions, I do not find any error apparent on the face of the record in the impugned order, so as to interfere with the same under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 6. There is no merit in this writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.Petition dismissed. *******