C.R. No.4894 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.4894 of 2010 Date of Decision: 15.09.2010 Bhupinder Kaur and another .……Petitioners Versus National Insurance Company and others ……Respondents Coram:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL. Present: Mr.Sham Lal Bhalla, Advocate for Mr.Satinder Khanna, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Sandeep Suri, Advocate for the respondents. L. N. MITTAL, J (ORAL) This is revision petition by Bhupinder Kaur and Manveer Kaur claimants under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning order dated 27.01.2010 Annexure P-2 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ludhiana. Claim petition under the Motor Vehicles Act was filed by petitioners and proforma respondent No.4 herein against respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein, who are insurer, driver and owner respectively of the alleged offending truck. The said claim petition was allowed by the Claims Tribunal. However, insurance company respondent No.1 was given right to recover the awarded amount from respondent Nos.2 and 3 (driver and owner of the Truck) after paying the same to the claimants. Accordingly, respondent No.1-Insurance Company deposited the compensation amount before the Claims Tribunal and filed execution petition for recovery of the amount from respondent C.R. No.4894 of 2010 -2- Nos.2 and 3 herein. In that execution petition filed by respondent No.1, learned Claims Tribunal ordered issuance of notice of the execution application to the owner of the Truck and in the meanwhile, stayed the disbursement of the deposited amount. Feeling aggrieved, instant revision petition has been filed by two out of the three claimants. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that there was no occasion for the Tribunal to stay the disbursement of the awarded amount to the claimants merely because insurer has filed execution petition against driver and owner of the Truck for recovery of the said amount. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1 could not advance any meaningful argument to controvert this contention. Contention raised by counsel for the petitioners is forceful and merits acceptance. Awarded amount has to be disbursed to the claimants irrespective of the right of the insurer to recover the same from driver and owner of the Truck. In these circumstances, no purpose would be served by staying the disbursement of the awarded amount to the claimants. The said amount has already been deposited by the insurer. There is no reason why the claimants should be deprived of the said amount unnecessarily. By staying the disbursement of the said amount of the claimants, the Tribunal has illegally deprived the claimants of the said amount and the claimants would thereby suffer unnecessary loss of interest on the said amount or would not be able to utilize the same. It appears that the impugned order has been passed by the Claims Tribunal without application of mind at all. The C.R. No.4894 of 2010 -3- impugned order is completely illegal, erroneous and unsustainable. For the reasons aforesaid, the instant revision petition is allowed and impugned order dated 27.01.2010 Annexure P-2 passed by the Claims Tribunal is set aside to the extent of staying the disbursement of the compensation amount to the claimants. Accordingly, the Tribunal is directed to disburse the deposited amount to the claimants in accordance with law. ( L. N. MITTAL ) JUDGE 15.09.2010. A. Kaundal