FAO No. 2104 of 2008 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. 2104 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision: 19.4.2010. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. ....Appellant Versus Smt. Nirmala and others ...Respondents CORAM : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present:- Mr. Suman Jain, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Tejinder Pal Singh, Advocate for respondents No. 1 to 6. Mr. Rajesh Malik, Advocate for respondent No. 7. RAJESH BINDAL, J **** The only ground on which the Insurance Company had challenged the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Panipat, was that though the two vehicles involved in the accident were held to be guilty of contributory negligence to the extent of 50-50, one of the vehicle involved in the accident was not insured. However, still the learned Tribunal had directed the Insurance Company of one vehicle to pay the entire amount and recover 50% from the owner of the other vehicle, which was not insured. Learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 1 to 6-claimants submitted that the matter in dispute has been compromised by the claimants with the owner of other vehicle, which was not insured. They have infact recovered 50% amount which was to be paid by the owner of the un-insured vehicle and 50% amount has been recovered from the appellant-Insurance Company. They have not withdrawn entire amount deposited by the appellant- Insurance Company from the Executing Court as 50% is still lying with the Tribunal and they have no objection in setting aside the direction issued by the Tribunal to the extent that the claimants will have right to recover the entire amount of compensation from the appellant-Insurance Company. Considering the aforesaid fair stand of learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 6-claimants, the direction issued by the Tribunal for payment of entire amount of compensation by the appellant-Insurance Company is modified to the extent that both appellant/Insurance company and the owner FAO No. 2104 of 2008 (O&M) 2 and driver of other vehicle i.e. combine, which was not insured, shall satisfy the award individually to the extent of 50% each. The amount of compensation, if any, deposited by the appellant-Insurance Company before the Tribunal which is more than 50% of the amount of compensation, shall be refunded to the appellant. The present appeal is disposed of accordingly. (RAJESH BINDAL) 19.4.2010. JUDGE Reema