In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh F.A.O. No. 565 of 1996 Date of decision: July 07, 2009 The New India Insurance Company Limited .. Appellant Vs. Balbir Kaur and others .. Respondents FAO No. 909 of 1996 New India Assurance Company Limited .. Appellant Vs. Sarabjit Kaur and others .. Respondents FAO No. 78 of 1997 Balbir Kaur and others .. Appellants Vs. Devinder Singh and others .. Respondents FAO No. 79 of 1997 Sarabjit Kaur and others .. Appellants Vs. Devinder Singh and others .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for Mr. Deepak Suri, Advocate. Mr. B.S. Jaswal, Advocate Mr. Arun Jindal, Advocate A.N. Jindal, J This judgment shall dispose of connected FAO Nos. 565 and 909 of 1996, 78 and 79 of 1997, having arisen out of the common award. F.A.O. No. 565 of 1996, FAO No. 909 of 1996, FAO No. 78 of 1997 & FAO No. 79 of 1997 -2- The facts are taken from FAO No.565 of 1996. This appeal preferred by the Insurance Company is directed against the award dated 1.12.1995 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala (herein referred as 'the Tribunal'), whereby, it awarded a sum of Rs.50,000/- to the claimants-respondents on account of no fault liability. Since the accident had occurred on 12.12.1993, therefore, the point raised by the Insurance Company is that amendment with regard to enhancement of compensation from Rs.25,000/- to Rs.50,000/-, on account of no fault liability does not apply retrospectively. Faced with the situation, learned Single Judge referred the matter to the Division Bench for decision. Learned Division Bench comprising of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Uma Nath Singh and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajive Bhalla, vide order dated 10.12.2007, observed as under :- “Thus, we hold that the amendment to Section 140 (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, enhancing the amount of no fault liability compensation from Rs.25,000/- to Rs.50,000/-, in case of death, would apply retrospectively and we answer accordingly.” On receipt back of the reference, arguments heard. Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate has stated that only point raised in this appeal has already been answered by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, but he keeps his reservations regarding the decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench and insists that the claimants are entitled only for a sum of Rs.25,000/- on account of no fault liability. Since the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court has already answered the reference, nothing remains to be decided on merits. Learned counsel for the claimants-respondents also pray for dismissal of the appeal. Thus, in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, answering the reference, these appeals stand dismissed. July 07, 2009 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge