FAO No. 2844 of 2010 -1- In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Misc. No. 13435/CII of 2010 and FAO No. 2844 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 20.5.2010 Bhupinder Singh @ Harpinder Singh and another ... Appellants vs Jaspinder Kaur and others .... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. M. S. Bedi, Senior Advocate with Ms. Mandeep K. Batth, Advocate, for the appellants. Rajesh Bindal J. Challenge in the present appeal is to the award passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gurdaspur (for short, `the Tribunal'). Alongwith the appeal, an application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal has also been filed. Briefly, the facts are that on 20.9.2007, Tajinder Singh (since deceased) was going on his motorcycle bearing registration no. PB-8K-9827 towards Batala side. His brother Upinder Singh was also accompanying him on his scooter bearing registration no. PB-18-D-2947. When they reached near mour of Sangatpura, on account of negligence of driver of tractor bearing registration no. PB-18J-5824, Tajinder Singh fell down and received multiple injuries. He was admitted in Civil Hospital, Batala on 20.9.2007 and thereafter referred to Amandeep Hospital, Amaritsar, where he breathed his last on 30.9.2007. FIR was lodged on 1.10.2007 with Police Station Civil Lines Batala. Claim petition filed by the dependents of the deceased was allowed and the learned Tribunal granted compensation of Rs. 18,58,000/- along with interest @ 9% per annum vide award dated 12.12.2009. It is against the award of interest @ 9% per annum that the present appeal has been filed. The only argument raised by the learned counsel for the appellants is that the rate of interest awarded by the learned Tribunal to the claimants is on the higher side where it has directed the payment of compensation along with interest @ 9% per annum whereas it should not be more than 6%. FAO No. 2844 of 2010 -2- After hearing learned counsel for the appellants, I do not find any merit in the submissions made. Award of interest @ 9% per annum cannot be said on higher side considering the rate of inflation during the last 2-3 years. The rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal is not abnormally high which call for any interference by this court. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in the present appeal, the same is dismissed. As the appeal itself is without any merit, even the application for condonation of delay is also dismissed. 20.5.2010 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge