RAM CHAND GUPTA, J. - (1.) PETITIONER has invoked supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing of order dated 24.12.2010, Annexure P6, passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gurdaspur, (hereinafter to be referred as the 'Tribunal'), vide which application filed by petitioner-claimant under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter to be referred as the 'Code') for amendment of the claim petition was dismissed.
(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned order passed by learned Tribunal. Facts relevant for the decision of present revision petition are that a petition for compensation was filed by present petitioner-claimant under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter to be referred as the 'Act') on account of injuries sustained by her in the accident. In the petition, income of the petitioner-claimant was taken as Rs.5,000.00 per month. However, by way of amendment the income is sought to be curtailed from Rs.5,000.00 per month to Rs.3,300.00 per month.
(3.) IT has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner- claimant that she was having no fixed income and it was only alleged that she used to do stitching, embroidery and house-hold work and hence the income of the petitioner-claimant was mentioned by approximation. It is further contended that petitioner-claimant only intends to reduce the said income from Rs.5,000.00 per month to Rs.3,300.00 per month. He has also placed reliance upon a judgment rendered by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Civil Revision No.1629 of 2009 decided on 31.8.2009 (Sukhwinder Kaur and another v. Kuldip Singh and another).;