IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 3288 of 2011 Date of decision: 23.5.2011 ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, Chandigarh … Petitioner versus Harrachhpal Kaur and others … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present: Mr. R.S.Dhull, Advocate, for the petitioner ... ARVIND KUMAR, J: The petitioner-insurance company is aggrieved with order dated 24.12.2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Fast Track), Patiala, allowing the application of the claimants for withdrawal of the claim petition with liberty to file a fresh application before the Appropriate Authority under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. The stated facts are that Balbir Singh and Akhtar Nasim were driver and cleaner of truck bearing registration No. PB-11AH-8545 which met with an accident on 17.4.2009 at about 1 AM, resulting into the death of the said persons. The legal representatives of the deceased-driver filed a claim application under the Workmen’s Compensation Act which was allowed on 25.6.2010 whereas the legal representatives of the cleaner Akhtar Nasim filed a petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sonepat, on 7.8.2009 but withdrew it on 14.8.2009 and filed another petition on 17.8.2009 before the MACT Patiala which vide the impugned order has been permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh application before the Appropriate Authority under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. Hence, this revision. Heard. The Tribunal while disposing of the application has observed as follows:- “ After carefully considering respective contentions of C.R. No. 3288 of 2011 -2- the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that permission should be granted to the petitioners to seek relief Appropriate Authority under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, because petitioner No.1 is illiterate widow and petitioner No. 2 to 4 are minor children to deceased Akhtar Nasim, who died in motor vehicle accident dated 17.4.2009 caused by the truck in question, whereupon he was working as Cleaner-cum- Loader and as per insurance policy of this truck employee of the truck is covered under the insurance. The mere fact that previously the petitioner filed a similar claim petition before Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sonipat, which has been dismissed does not debar the petitioner from seeking withdrawal the present claim petition with permission to file fresh application under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. Effect of filing and dismissal of previous claim petition, if any, can be taken into consideration by the Appropriate Authority under Workmen’s Compensation Act at the time of disposal of application of the petitioners.” Further, it is not in dispute that the legal representatives of the driver have already been awarded compensation by the Appropriate Authority under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. In this back-drop of the facts, there is no infirmity in the impugned order. No interference is called for. The revision petition stands dismissed. Any observation made hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression on the merits of the case. May 23, 2011 ( ARVIND KUMAR ) JS JUDGE