JUDGMENT : Jayant Patel, J. Rule. Mr. Shastri learned Counsel waives service of notice of rule for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. 2. With the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for both the sides, the matter is finally heard today. 3. The short facts of the case appear to be that the petitioner filed claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal being M.A.C.P. No. 906 of 1998 for recovery of the compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-. The tribunal had passed the order for interim compensation of Rs.25,000/-. Thereafter, on 5.6.2007, learned advocate for the petitioner as well as respondent submitted purshis that they are agreeable for the compensation, which is paid, and they are not desirous to proceed with the matter. The tribunal acted upon the same, and disposed of the matter vide order dated 5.6.2007. Under these circumstances, the present petition. 4. Heard Mr. Patel learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Shastri learned Counsel for the respondents. 5. The petitioner has filed the affidavit stating that the advocate has committed an error and mistake in bona fide, because he considered that there is disability to the extent of 12 percent only. The petitioner is now desirous to proceed with the matter, and as per his declaration, the concession given by the advocate, was without proper instructions by the petitioner. 6. Mr. Shastri learned Counsel for the respondents is not in a position to show any material on the basis of which, it can be said that there was any authority on the part of the advocate for such purpose. It appears that the tribunal has acted upon the purshis, and has disposed of the matter accordingly. 7. Considering the affidavit filed by the petitioner, as the petitioner is desirous to proceed with the matter in accordance with law before the tribunal, if such is permitted, no prejudice will be caused. Further, no material is produced on record to show that either side had taken any undue benefit from the declaration filed before the tribunal, which led the tribunal to disposed of the matter. 8. In view of the above, the impugned decision of the tribunal for disposal of the matter on the basis of purshish filed by the advocate of the petitioner is quashed and set aside with the direction that the M.A.C.P. No. 906 of 1998 shall stand restored to the file of the tribunal. 8. In view of the above, the impugned decision of the tribunal for disposal of the matter on the basis of purshish filed by the advocate of the petitioner is quashed and set aside with the direction that the M.A.C.P. No. 906 of 1998 shall stand restored to the file of the tribunal. The tribunal shall decide the same in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to both the sides. 9. The petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule made absolute accordingly.