IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 114 Attar Singh Girdhari Lal and others CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA J. appeal seeking enhancement of compensation of Rs.55,000/ by the learned dated 16.2.2010 in a petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act. yet to be issued in the same as the matter has been repeatedly adjourned either due to non counsel for the appellant the following order was passed by this Court : FAO-4212-2010 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.4212 of 2010 Date of decision : Attar Singh Versus Girdhari Lal and others CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA None for the appellant. NIDHI GUPTA J. The appellant-injured/claimant has filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation of Rs.55,000/ by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rohtak vide Award dated 16.2.2010 in a petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act. Although the present appeal is of the year 2010, notice is yet to be issued in the same as the matter has been repeatedly d either due to non-appearance or on request of learned counsel for the appellant. On the last date of hearing i.e. 04.2.2025 the following order was passed by this Court : “Learned counsel for the appellant submits that his Clerk has misplaced the brief time to locate the same. Adjourned to 20.08.2025, for arguments. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.4212 of 2010 (O & M) Date of decision :-20.08.2025 …..Appellant …..Respondents HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA injured/claimant has filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation of Rs.55,000/- awarded Accident Claims Tribunal, Rohtak vide Award dated 16.2.2010 in a petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Although the present appeal is of the year 2010, notice is yet to be issued in the same as the matter has been repeatedly appearance or on request of learned . On the last date of hearing i.e. 04.2.2025 the following order was passed by this Court :- “Learned counsel for the appellant submits that his Clerk has misplaced the brief and seeks time to locate the same. Adjourned to 20.08.2025, for arguments. VIJAY ASIJA 2025.08.25 18.23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document of in the absence of the appellant. impugned Award dated 16.2.2010 as perusal of the record reveals that the appellant had previous 1997/23 of 2000 was awarded Rs.1,80,000/ and 4 were proceeded against ex Under 9 Rule 13 CPC was mov dismissed by the learned Tribunal on 21.1.2005; whereafter Civil Revision No.771 of 2005 was preferred by the respondent No.1/owner of the offending vehicle, which was allowed vide order dated 16.5.2005 and the ex Award dated 02.2.2001 was set aside; and the original MACT case was restored to its original number and the said amount of Rs.1,80,000/ on record that Rs.1,25,000/ the proceedings before this Court and the same is also reflected in the order dated 16.5.2005 passed by this Court in the aforesaid Civil Revision Petition. Therefore, only the balance amount of Rs.55,000/ remained FAO-4212-2010 (O & M) It is, however, made clear that no further adjournment shall be granted as the matter pertains to the year 2010.” Today there is no representation on behalf of appellant. In view of the same, the present appeal is being disposed of in the absence of the appellant. Even on merits, no ground is made out to interfere in the impugned Award dated 16.2.2010 as perusal of the record reveals that the appellant had previously also filed a MACT Case No.77 of 1997/23 of 2000, which was decided on 02.2.2001 and the appellant was awarded Rs.1,80,000/-. At that stage, the respondents No.1, 2 and 4 were proceeded against ex-parte. Subsequently, an application Under 9 Rule 13 CPC was moved by respondent No.1, which was dismissed by the learned Tribunal on 21.1.2005; whereafter Civil Revision No.771 of 2005 was preferred by the respondent No.1/owner of the offending vehicle, which was allowed vide order dated 16.5.2005 and the ex-parte proceedings were set aside and also the Award dated 02.2.2001 was set aside; and the original MACT case was restored to its original number and the said amount of Rs.1,80,000/- was again awarded to the appellant. It is admitted fact on record that Rs.1,25,000/- was already paid to the claimant during the proceedings before this Court and the same is also reflected in the order dated 16.5.2005 passed by this Court in the aforesaid Civil Revision Petition. Therefore, only the balance amount of Rs.55,000/ to be paid. 2 It is, however, made clear that no further adjournment shall be granted as the matter pertains to the year 2010.” oday there is no representation on behalf of appellant. view of the same, the present appeal is being disposed Even on merits, no ground is made out to interfere in the impugned Award dated 16.2.2010 as perusal of the record reveals that filed a MACT Case No.77 of , which was decided on 02.2.2001 and the appellant . At that stage, the respondents No.1, 2 parte. Subsequently, an application ed by respondent No.1, which was dismissed by the learned Tribunal on 21.1.2005; whereafter Civil Revision No.771 of 2005 was preferred by the respondent No.1/owner of the offending vehicle, which was allowed vide order dated ceedings were set aside and also the Award dated 02.2.2001 was set aside; and the original MACT case was restored to its original number and the said amount of awarded to the appellant. It is admitted fact s already paid to the claimant during the proceedings before this Court and the same is also reflected in the order dated 16.5.2005 passed by this Court in the aforesaid Civil Revision Petition. Therefore, only the balance amount of Rs.55,000/- VIJAY ASIJA 2025.08.25 18.23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Rs.55,000/ No.3-Insurance Company and respondent No.3 has been granted the recovery rights. interfere in the impugned Award, therefore, the present appeal is hereby dismissed August 20 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No FAO-4212-2010 (O & M) Accordingly, vide the present Award the remaining Rs.55,000/- was directed to be paid to the claimant by the respondent Insurance Company and respondent No.3 has been granted the recovery rights. In view of the above facts no ground is ma interfere in the impugned Award, therefore, the present appeal is dismissed Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. 20, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No 3 Accordingly, vide the present Award the remaining was directed to be paid to the claimant by the respondent Insurance Company and respondent No.3 has been granted the In view of the above facts no ground is made out to interfere in the impugned Award, therefore, the present appeal is Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2025.08.25 18.23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document