Shamsner Bahadur, J. - (1.) This application which is described as a civil Revision petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India raises a question of considerable importance on which the parties' counsel are agreed there is no authoritative pronouncement.
(2.) In an accident which took place on 11th of February, 1959, Bachan Singh, a passenger in the bus, was killed and a claim was made by his widow and two daughters before the Accidents Claims Tribunal under Sec. 110 -A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter called the Act). The Tribunal made an award on 11th October, 1960 in which compensation payable to the claimants was assessed at Rs. 18,000/ -. Sham Kaur, the widow, was to be paid Rs. 8000/ - while Harbans Kaur and Balbir Kaur daughters were to be given sums of Rs. 4000/ - and 6,000/ -, respectively. The Tribunal however held that the claim made by the daughters was barred by time. An appeal from the judgment of the Tribunal was preferred to the High Court which on 15th December, 1965, raised the -amount of compensation to Rs. 36,000/ -and also held that the claim of the daughters of Bachan Singh was within time The apportionment of the assessment of Rs. 36,000/ - was made as follows: (1) Rs. 16,000/ - to the widow, (2) Rs. 8,000/ - to Harbans Kaur, and (3) Rs. 12,000/ - to Balbir Kaur. It may be mentioned in passing that the two daughters were treated on a different footing as Balbir Kaur was an unmarried minor. Out of the sum of Rs. 36,000/ - a sum of Rs. 2000/ - was to be paid by the insurance company, namely the Northern India Transporters Insurance Company, and the balance of Rs. 34,000/ - was to be paid by the second Respondent, Sheikhupura Transport Company Limited, whose driver was held responsible for the accident. There is no dispute with regard to the sum of Rs. 2000/ - which has been paid to the claimants by the insurance company.
(3.) For the purpose of realising the balance of Rs. 34,000/ - the Petitioners Sham Kaur and her daughters moved the Claims Tribunal in execution proceedings under Rule 9.4 (6) of Chapter IX of the Punjab Motor Vehicles Rules, 1940. Under this rule "the Claims Tribunal shall have all the powers in regard to contempts, tesistance and the like which a civil Court may exercise in the execution of a decree". Rule 9.4, under which there are six sub -rules, relates to the procedure and powers of Claims Tribunal and Sub -rule (6) which has been cited above is pre -fixed by the words "in enforcing of the orders". There is not a word in the first five sub -rules of Rule 9.4 about the execution of assessment orders made by the Claims Tribunal and all that is said is that evidence before the Claims Tribunal is to be recorded in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure. Adverting to the provisions of the Act itself, reference may be made to Sec. 110 -A, which is headed by the caption "application for compensation". Such an application for compensation, under Sub -section (1), can be made by the persons specified in Clauses (a), (b) and (c); Sub -section (2) requires that such an application has to be made before the Claims Tribunal having jurisdiction over the area in which the accident occurred. Sub -section (3) which provides a valuable clue says that "no application for compensation under this Sec. shall be entertained unless it is made within sixty days of the occurrence of the accident.;