C.R.No.6474 of 2011 #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.6474 of 2011 Date of Decision: 21.10.2011 Inderjeet Singh and another ....Petitioners Versus Inderjeet Kaur and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Jasmeet Singh Bhatia, Advocate for the petitioners. JASWANT SINGH, J By filing the present revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, petitioner-judgment debtors have laid challenge to the impugned order dated 22.9.2011 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Ludhiana whereby their objections filed in the execution petition have been dismissed and warrant of attachment of their property ordered to be issued. Brief facts of the case are that respondents-claimants filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “the Act”) before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ludhiana (for short “the Tribunal”) seeking compensation on account of death of Kuldeep Singh-husband of respondent No.1 and father of respondent C.R.No.6474 of 2011 #2# No.2 and son of respondent No.3 respectively, which was contested by the JDs. On the basis of material available on record, the learned Tribunal allowed the claim petition vide its award dated 17.12.2009 to the tune of Rs.10,25,000/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till its realization against the respondents- petitioners (JDs). For execution of the award, an execution petition was filed by the claimants-respondents on 23.1.2010, which was opposed by filing objections by the petitioners-JDs. Reply to the objections filed by the petitioners was also moved by the claimants- respondents. After hearing both the sides, learned Tribunal has dismissed the objections filed by the Jds-petitioners vide the impugned order, hence the present petition. Learned counsel for the petitioners-JDs argues that since an FAO No.5105 of 2010 has already been filed against the award dated 17.12.2009 passed by the learned Tribunal and the same stands admitted by this Court and not decided so far, therefore, there was no occasion for the learned Tribunal to dismiss the objections filed by the petitioners rather it ought to have deferred the execution proceedings to await the decision of this Court. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the paper book, this Court does not find any merit in the present petition and the same deserves dismissal. A perusal of the impugned order clearly reveals that this was an admitted position between the parties that no stay order has C.R.No.6474 of 2011 #3# been granted by this Court against the award dated 17.12.2009 passed by the learned Tribunal. Even before this Court also, the said fact is not disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. As on today, there is a valid and executable award against the petitioners- JDs passed by the learned Tribunal on account of the death of Kuldeep Singh in a Motor Vehicle Accident on 22.4.2007. It is not dispute that the Jds/petitioners were afforded full opportunity of being heard before the learned Tribunal to represent their cause and the award has been passed in their presence. A period of more than four and half years has lapsed since the death of sole bread earner of the family and there is no reason to delay the execution in the absence of any stay against the award dated 17.12.2009. Since there is no order passed by this Court staying the operation of the award dated 17.12.2009, it will not be appropriate to halt the execution proceedings any more. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order dated 22.9.2011 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Ludhiana while exercising powers under Article 227 of the Constitution. Dismissed. October 21, 2011 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE