IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.281 of 1988 Date of decision : 29.10.2009 Mrs.Geeta Aggarwal and another … Appellants Versus Inder Kaur and others …Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.L.M.Suri Sr. Advocate with Mr.Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for the appellants. Mr.G.S.Verma, Advocate for respondent No.2 (in FAO No.284 and 327 of 1998) Mr.Munishwar Puri, Advocate for respondent No.3-Insurance Co. A.N.Jindal, J. (Oral) By this common order, I propose to dispose of FAO Nos.281 to 284 and 326 to 329 of 1988 as all these appeal have arisen against a common order dated 12.6.1987 passed by Motor Accident Claims Triunal, Amritsar. From the facts and circumstances, it transpires that all the claim petitions were consolidated with the case of Amarjit Kaur vs. Jawant Singh, MACT case 14/85 vide order dated 2.2.1986 and the entire evidence was to be recoded in the aforesaid case. Thus, it was incumbent of the Tribunal to pass a consolidated judgment with a further direction to place a copy of the order in all the connected matters. In this situation, if the issues had been framed earlier, similar issues could be consolidated and the separate issues could be discussed while making observations in that consolidated judgment. If the cases are consolidated without any objection, then no separate judgments are required to be recorded. While scrutinizing the judgments under appeal, I am of the opinion that the same suffer from serious illegalities. All the claim petitions are under Motor Vehicles Act 1939 therefore, the court was bound to consider as to who were dependants and competent to file the claim petition and receive FAO No.281 of 1988 the compensation. The court also did not consider as to what was the dependency of the deceased and what pecuniary and propriety loss the claimants suffered on account of death of the deceased. Many judgments have been referred in the impugned judgment, but no reasons for placing reliance on the same has been discussed. No para meters for assessment of income of the deceased, the dependency and multiplier have been observed while awarding compensation. In these circumstances, without commenting over the conduct of the Presiding Officer while deciding the cases, as it would be too late in the day, it would be expedient and in the interest of justice to remit the cases back for re-decision. Consequently, all the appeals are accepted, the impugned judgments are set aside; and all the cases are remitted back to the Tribunal for deciding afresh on the quantum of compensation on the basis of the evidence already before it after appreciating the appropriate provisions and the law on the point of prevailing at that time. Parties are directed to appear before the tribunal on 23.12.2009. [ A.N.Jindal ] Judge 29.10.2009 sd 2