CWP No.19733 of 2010.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.19733 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 25.03.2011 **** Indu Bala & Ors. . . . . Petitioners VS. District Judge, Gurdaspur & Ors. . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. RS Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for respondent No.5 **** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioners are widow, minor son and mother, respectively of the deceased Ranjit Singh who died in a road accident. They filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gurdaspur which was disposed of on 25.02.2006 in Lok Adalat by awarding the compensation of Rs.2.50 lacs which was ordered to be distributed amongst the petitioners at the rate of 45%, 45% & 10%, respectively. The petitioners thereafter moved an application on 29.08.2006 to recall the said Award primarily on the ground that they never authorized their counsel to enter into any compromise and it was only when they did not find the case listed in CWP No.19733 of 2010.doc - 2 – the cause list on 05.04.2006 i.e. the date fixed, that on enquiry, they came to know that the case had already been decided on 25.02.2006. The application has been rejected by the Chairman of the District Legal Services Authority, Gurdaspur being not maintainable though leaving it open for the petitioners to avail any other remedy in law. (2). The aggrieved petitioners have approached this Court. (3). Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it appear that the petitioners were not aware of the implications of the compromise entered into on their behalf and the Award appears to have been passed without their ‘informed consent’. (4). It would be expedient if the claim petition is decided on merits. (5). The writ petition is accordingly allowed; the impugned award dated 04.02.2009 (Annexure P5) and the subsequent order dated 25.02.2006 (Annexure P3) are hereby set aside and the matter is remitted to the MACT, Gurdaspur to decide the claim petition filed by the petitioners on merits expeditiously and in accordance with law. (6). It is informed by Sh. Talwar that the amount of Rs. 2.50 lacs awarded by the Lok Adalat has already been deposited with the Tribunal. It is directed that the said CWP No.19733 of 2010.doc - 3 – amount shall be adjusted against the final award to be passed. The parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal Gurdaspur on 18.05.2011. (7). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 25.03.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge