C.R.No.3150 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.3150 of 2009 Date of Decision : 10.07.2009 Savita Rani and Others ...Petitioners Versus Munna Lal and Others ...Respondents CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: Mr. R.S.Mamli, Advocate, for the petitioners. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The challenge in the present petition is to the order passed by the learned Motor Accident Claim Tribunal on 20.4.2009, whereby an application filed by the Insurance Company to take over the defence of owner and the driver in terms of Section 170 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, was allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that the Tribunal has allowed the application without given any reason, which may reflect collusion between the owner and the claimants. Even, the Insurance company has not pleaded that the owner and claimants have colluded in its application. It is further argued that claimants have examined 9 witnesses, which have been cross-examined by the counsel representing owner and the driver as well. It shows that there is no collusion between owner and the claimants. The Insurance Company has sought to take over defence inter alia on the ground that during investigation conducted by the Insurance C.R.No.3150 of 2009 2 Company, it was found that the accident was not caused by the insured vehicle and that there are chances of collusion between the petitioners and owner/driver of the alleged vehicle. The said fact has taken into consideration by the learned rial Court, while permitting Insurance Company to take over the defence. The taking over of defence of the owner does not affect the rights of the claimants, but operates against the interest of the owner, who is not aggrieved of the order passed. In view of the said fact, I do not find any merit in the grievance raised by the petitioners in the present revision petition. Dismissed. 10.07.2009 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE