K. S. Kumaran, J.

1. Heard counsel. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that a fraud had been committed on the insurance company and that had not been taken note of by the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned award. Even according to the learned counsel for the appellant, the fraud allegedly purported by the claimants had come to the knowledge of the insurance company even while proceedings were on before the Tribunal. But, yet the appellant had not filed an application under sec. 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act and obtained an order to contest the claim petition on all grounds that are open to the owner of the vehicle insured. Having failed to do so, we are of the view that the appeal itself is not maintainable in view of the Division Bench decision of this court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. V/s. Balbir Kaur, 2001 ACJ 555 (Pandh ). But yet the learned counsel for the appellant contends that this could be treated as a writ petition and appropriate orders be passed. In view of this, it is ordered that this appeal be treated as writ petition. Registry is directed to give it an appropriate number.

2. After having heard the counsel for the petitioner, we are of th