C.R.No.7348 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.7348 of 2009. Decided on: December 11, 2009. Shakuntla Devi and another .. Petitioners VERSUS Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and others .. Respondents * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporter? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? * * * PRESENT Mr.Ashwani Arora, Advocate, for the petitioners. M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) The petitioners had been awarded compensation of Rs.3,40,000/- along with interest @ 7 per cent per annum as per the Award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal dated 18.07.2009. In execution application, the Tribunal has ordered the disbursement of the amount of Award subject to the claimants furnishing indemnity bond/surety bond in the sum of Rs.4,50,000/-. The condition imposed for disbursement of the . . . 1 C.R.No.7348 of 2009 amount of Award has been challenged by filing this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, on the ground that the claimants are residents of Uttar Pradesh and the order of imposition of a condition to furnish indemnity bond or surety bond is not warranted from the Award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. It has also been submitted that the Award has become final as no appeal has been filed by any of the respondents. Counsel for the petitioner relies upon orders passed in C.R.No.6621 of 2008, decided on 01.12.2008, Rekha Dutt & another Vs. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and others, and C.R.No.3227 of 2009, decided on 29.05.2009, Chander Wati and another Vs. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ropar & others, wherein such orders passed by the executing Courts imposing condition for the release of the amount of Award subject to furnishing indemnity bond stand set aside. A perusal of the impugned order dated 22.10.2009, indicates that the order had been passed in absence of the parties. The reasons for imposing condition for disbursement are not reflected in the impugned order. The order dated 22.10.2009 is, thus, set aside. This revision petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the executing Court and cite the judgments in the above noted revision petitions. In case any such application is filed, the executing Court will consider the circumstances afresh by hearing the petitioners and pass a speaking . . . 2 C.R.No.7348 of 2009 order. It is observed that in case the executing Court is satisfied that execution application is bona fide and has been filed by the actual claimants, it will be open to the executing Court to disburse the amount of award unconditionally. In case any such application is filed, the executing Tribunal will decide the same within one month after filing of the application. (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE December 11, 2009. rka . . . 3