1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1865/2009 (Shaya Mohd. Vs. Smt. Makhani & Ors.) Date of order : 09.03.2009 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr. Sukh Deo Vyas, for the petitioner. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner is challenging the order dated 6.10.2008 Annexure-4 passed by Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Tribunal, Jaisalmer upon the application filed by the petitioner under Sections 152 and 153 C.P.C. and Section 147 M.V. Act and alternatively it was prayed that the Tribunal may be directed to give copy of the award under Section 162 of M.V. Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under Section 168 (2) of M.V. Act, the Tribunal is under obligation to deliver the copies of the award to the parties concerned expeditiously and in any case within a period of fifteen days from the date of award but in this case the Tribunal has not complied with the aforesaid provision and not delivered the copy of the award, therefore, the Tribunal may be directed to 2 deliver the copy of the award so as to enable the petitioner to file appeal. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that though the petitioner has made the above alternative prayer in the writ petition but his main prayer is that his application was wrongly rejected by the Tribunal. He has pointed out that error has been committed by the Tribunal in passing the award. I have perused the order impugned Annexure-4. In my opinion, learned Tribunal has rightly observed that there is no question of reviewing the judgment passed by learned Tribunal in M.A.C.T. Case No.34/2003 dated 30.8.2006, therefore, no error has been committed by learned Tribunal while rejecting the application filed by the petitioner, therefore, first prayer of the petitioner is rejected. For the purpose of second prayer, it is obvious that there is provision under the M.V. Act for delivering the copy of the award to the parties concerned but at the same time according to the procedure the petitioner can file application and can obtain the certified copy of the award. In my opinion, before filing application under Section 152 and 153 C.P.C., the petitioner obtained the certified copy of the order, therefore, he has chosen to file an application for alleged error, which is alleged to be committed by the Tribunal. Meaning thereby, the certified copy of the 3 award was obtained by the petitioner and the judgment dated 13.8.2006 already comes to the knowledge of the petitioner, therefore, once the judgment rendered by the Tribunal came to the knowledge of the petitioner, then, now the petitioner cannot insist the prayer for delivering the copy of the award. However, if still the petitioner thinks that he is entitled under Section 168 (2) of the M.V. Act to obtain the copy of the award, which was required to be delivered to him by the Tribunal under the said provision then the petitioner may point out the Tribunal by way of filing application that he has not been supplied the copy of the award. Upon filing such application, the learned Tribunal may decide the question of delivering the copy of the award to him in accordance with law while taking into consideration the provisions of Section 168 (2) of M.V. Act. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition is disposed of. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. arun