Civil Revision No. 3227 of 2009 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 3227 of 2009 Date of decision: 29.05.2009. Chander Wati and another ...Petitioners Versus Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ropar and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. Present: Mr. Ashwani Arora, Advocate for the petitioners ***** S.D.ANAND, J. The petitioners are legal representatives/parents of Dharminder Singh who died in the impugned motor vehicular accident. They filed a claim petition. The petition was allowed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal( hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal). The Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.2,74,500/- in favour of the petitioners and against respondents no.2 and 3 whose liability to pay that amount was held to be joint and several. The amount of compensation was ordered to be shared equally by the petitioners inter-se. Apart therefrom, it was ordered by the Tribunal that if the amount was deposited within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the award by the respondents, interest at the rate of 6% shall be payable on the amount aforementioned. However, if Civil Revision No. 3227 of 2009 -2- **** the amount is not deposited within two months aforementioned, the petitioner shall be entitled to pay the interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realisation of the awarded amount. The award amount was deposited. While ordering its disbursement, the learned Tribunal ordered that petitioners shall furnish indemnity bond in the sum of Rs. 3 lacs, with one surety in the like amount. The grievance of the petitioners is that imposition of the above condition is inappropriate. I have no hesitation in allowing the petition in limine, particularly in view of the fact that the impugned order affects only the petitioners and the respondents shall not, at all, be concerned with the implication thereof. The impugned award did not indicate that the award amount shall be released on furnishing of indemnity bond, with one surety in the like amount. There is no observation in the impugned order that any appeal against the impugned award is pending. In that view of things, the imposition of a stipulation of onerous character was not in order. The petition stand allowed in limine. The award amount shall be disbursed to the petitioners in terms of the award without the learned Tribunal insisting upon furnishing of indemnity bond at all. May 29, 2009 (S.D.Anand) Pka Judge Civil Revision No. 3227 of 2009 -3- ****