IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.4501 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: 10.2.2009 Urmila Devi and others ......Petitioners Versus Dinesh and others ......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Saurabh Dala, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Vijay Pal Singh, Advocate for Mr. Ajit Malik, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. D.R. Singla, Advocate for respondent No.3. * * * Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. This revision petition has been filed by the claimants- petitioners against order dated 12.8.2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jhajjar, whereby application for amendment of the plaint sought by the petitioners, has been rejected. Initially the claim petition was filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Subsequently, after the evidence of the parties was concluded, the petitioners converted this petition into one under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act by moving an amendment application. That order has attained finality. Now again, through this application, the petitioners want to make an amendment in the claim petition and reconvert the same under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The petitioners cannot be allowed to approbate and reprobate. Even otherwise the case is at the argument stage. I do not find any irregularity or error of jurisdiction in the impugned order. Dismissed. February 10, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE