1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 121 of 2009 Date of decision: 23.8.2011. ________________________________________________________________ Oriental Insurance Company Limited .....Petitioner. Versus Smt. Padma Devi & others. ...Respondents. Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, J. 1 Whether approved for reporting? No. ________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. G.C. Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Pawan Sharma, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate with Mr. No. 1. Dheeraj Vashist, Advocate. V.K. Sharma, J. (Oral). Though the award dated 6.9.2008 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kinnaur at Rampur Bushehar, District Shimla, H.P., which is under challenge in the present writ petition, is appealable under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, yet the present writ petition has been filed on the following averments setup vide para 6:- “6. That the petitioner has no other alternative or efficacious remedy under the Motor Vehicles Act and is also not entitled to file any appeal challenging the amount of compensation as the application under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act has been dismissed by the 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 2 respondent No. 4. The award is liable to be quashed and set aside by issuance of writ of certiorari.” 2. However, on perusal of the records of the learned Tribunal, particularly the zimini order dated 4.6.2008, which is extracted below, it is apparent that the application filed by the petitioner for grant of permission to contest the petition on all available grounds was allowed, as respondents No. 1 and 2 (driver and owner) before the said Tribunal were proceeded against exparte:- “An application filed by respondent No. 3 to contest the petition on all available grounds which is allowed as respondents No. 1 and 2 are driver and owner and are exparte.” 3. In view of above, the petition is disposed of with liberty reserved to the petitioner to seek its remedy, if any, before the appropriate Court/Forum, in accordance with law, if so advised. 4. The petition stands disposed of, so also pending CMP(s), if any. Copy Dasti. (V.K. Sharma) Judge 23rd August, 2011 (krs)