Vinod Kumar Sharma, J.

1. By way of present revision petition the petitioner has impugned order dated 26.7.2006 passed by learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, chandigarh (for short the Tribunal ).

2. The petitioner herein had filed a claim petition under sec. 163-A of the motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the Act)seeking compensation for the injuries suffered by him in a motor vehicular accident. In the claim petition the claimant had claimed that his monthly income was rs.9,600 and in addition thereto he had also been earning Rs.1,500 per month as overtime income.

3. During the pendency of the claim petition an application was moved under order 6, rule 17 of the Code of Civil procedure in order to reduce his pleaded income, i. e. , Rs.9,600 + Rs.1,500 to rs.3,200 per month notionally and also to reduce his original claim of compensation from Rs.10,00,000 to Rs.8,00,000. In support of his submissions, the petitioner had also relied upon the judgment of karnataka High Court in the case of Guruanna vadi V/s. General Manager, Karnataka State road Trans. Corpn. , 2001 ACJ 1528 (Karnataka) and also the judgment of this court in Gurmeet Kaur V/s. Hardeep Singh, 2006 acj 218