In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh F.A.O. No. 4193 of 2008 Date of decision: December 01, 2009 Arjun Singh and another .. Appellants Vs. Mahesh Soni and others .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mrs. Omkala Yadav, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate for the respondent No.3. A.N. Jindal, J This appeal for enhancement is directed against the award dated 5.9.2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rewari, awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.3,50,700/- along with interest @ 6% per annum in favour of the appellants-claimants. Though, while deciding the issue No.3, the Tribunal observed that since respondent No.1 was not holding a valid driving licence and respondent No.3 could be given right to recover the award amount, yet, it failed to pass the consistent operative order as no right of recovery was given to the respondentNo.3. The operative part of the order is reproduced as under :- “In view of my finding on issues No.1 to 3, this petition also stand partly allowed with costs and the petitioner No.1 is entitled for compensation of Rs.3,50,700/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of petition i.e. 3.1.2007 till its realization. It is directed that the 50% compensation amount, awarded to the petitioner No.1 shall be deposited in nationalized bank of the area, in a fixed deposit account for a period of two years and the said amount shall be paid to him on the expiry of the said period. It is further directed that 50% of the compensation along with interest be F.A.O. No. 4193 of 2008 -2- *** released to petitioner No.1. The liability to pay the above compensation is fastened upon the respondents No.1 to 3 jointly and severally. Memo of costs be drawn accordingly. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.” The judgment passed by the Tribunal appears to be self- contradictory. The Tribunal should have at least consolidated the findings and taken note of the observations given in the preceding paras while deciding issue of relief, therefore, the Tribunal should correct itself for future also. However, this appeal is accepted, the impugned order is set aside and the case is remitted back to the Tribunal to pass the order afresh after hearing the learned counsel for the parties. December 01, 2009 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge