Rakesh Garg, J. - (1.) THE insurance Company had filed the instant appeal i.e. FAO No. 4818 of 2009 challenging the Award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Rupnagar dated 16.7.2009.
(2.) THE said appeal was dismissed by this Court vide judgment dated 28.10.2009. The appellant filed SLP against the aforesaid order which was also dismissed. Hon'ble the Supreme Court passed the following order while dismissing the SLP on 26.3.2010: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner On the facts of the case, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order The Special Leave Petition is dismissed. However the petitioner is given liberty to file a review application in the High Court on the ground that certain points were pressed by it but they were not dealt with by the High Court." The instant review application has been filed by the appellant -Insurance Company seeking review of the order dated 28.10.2009. The review application reads thus: 1. That the appellant/applicant had filed the FAO No. 4818 of 2009 in this Hon'ble Court and the same was came for hearing on 28.10.2009 and after hearing the arguments, the appeal filed by the appellants was dismissed. 2. That the present appeal was filed by the appellant on the following grounds: - (a) That the driving licence of the offending vehicle was valid upto 4.1.2002 to 3.1.2005 and the same was renewed from 20.4.2005 to 19.4.2008 whereas the accident took place on 13.2.2005. Therefore, there was no driving licence on the date of accident. (b) That it was a case of collusion as the FIR was lodged on the same date but there is no name of the driver or number of the vehicle in the FIR. (c) That respondent No. 1 driver has pleaded that truck was parked on the road side and the driver of the motor cycle came rashly and negligently and struck against the front of the truck, therefore, he is not negligent. (d) That the claimant is a major son of 25 years of old and his dependency can not be 2/3rd and multiplier applied by the Ld. Tribunal is on the higher side. (e) That the application u/s. 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act filed by the appellant was allowed by the Ld. Tribunal vide order dated 1.5.2009. 3. That appellant filed the SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the ground that the arguments raised in the appeal on the ground of quantum, driving licence has not been properly dealt with as the application u/s. 170 of Motor Vehicles Act was allowed and driver was not having a licence on the day of accident and the other grounds as mentioned above.
(3.) THAT the above noted SLP came for hearing before Hon'ble Supreme Court on 26.3.2010 and after hearing the arguments, the same was dismissed but liberty was given to the appellant to file the review application in the Hon'ble High Court. Copy of the order dated 26.3.2010 is enclosed herewith as Annexure A -1.;