JUDGMENT 1. - This application under Section 151 C.P.C. has been Filed for recalling the judgment and order dated 27.9.2008 passed in S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1421/2007. 2. The short facts of the case are that the claimant filed application on 22.6.2001 under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act before the Additional District judge, Fast Track, No. 6, Udaipur stating therein that on 10.2.2004, the claimant met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the applicant-respondent. The learned Tribunal passed an award of Rs. 64,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum. In pursuance to the said award, the claimant Filed an execution petition and during the execution proceedings, it was agreed upon that Rs. 81,600/- will be paid in full and final satisfaction of the award and the application was filed to bring final satisfaction of that award on record on 26.5.2008. The executing Court accepted the settlement and it was found that the award has been satisfied and accordingly the execution petitioner was disposed of. In the meanwhile, and appeal for enhancement of compensation as filed by the complainant. However, the claim was fully satisfied and settled by the parties and the present applicant was under the impression that the appeal would be withdrawn by the claimant and they did not appear before this Court. The appeal was decided ex-parte and the amount of compensation was enhanced in absence of the present applicant. 3. The contention of the present applicant is that the claimant had not informed this Court regarding satisfaction of the claim as well as the factum of compromise and the fact that the emitting Court has already ordered that the award has been satisfied and the executing proceedings have been disposed of. Hence, this application has been filed for recalling of the judgment dated 27.9.2008 passed in S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1421/2007. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. The contention of the present applicant; is that the matter has been compromised by the parties and application filed under Section 151 C.P.C. clearly suggests that the matter has been fully and finally settled between the parties and, therefore, no Us remained pending between the parties and the matter has been settled and the executing Court also stated that the matter has taken the final shape. The settlement-deed also suggests so that the matter has been finally decided and no right of appeal has been reserved by the claimant. Hence, the appeal was not maintainable and it was the bona fide belief of the present applicant that the matter has been fully and finally settled between the parties and thus the appeal would be withdrawn. 6. The further contention is that it was an important fact, which should have been brought to the notice of this Court that compromise has arisen but the claimant has deliberately withheld this important material fact from this Court and hence the judgment should be recalled. 7. Per contra, the contention of the present non-applicant-appellant is that only award amount was settled. There is no recital in the settlement-deed that the appeal would be withdrawn and hence the appeal was justified. 8. It is true that there is no recital in the application under Section 151 C.P.C. filed before the executing Court that the appeal shall be withdrawn or what would happened to the appeal but at the same time, the composite reading of the application suggests that amount has been paid in full and final settlement of the award and patties are of the opinion that the matter has been finally settled and when the intention of the parties was that the matter should be settled finally, the appeal-was unwarranted. Furthermore, it was the duty of the claimants to bring the fact to the notice of the Court that after passing of the award, some events have taken place and the matter has been compromised between the parties. But, nothing has been brought on record. Furthermore, this Court, vide order dated 2.5.2012, has specifically ordered that the claimant-appellant should file an affidavit that why appropriate instructions were not given to the counsel regarding the fact that compromise has been arrived at between the parties but no such affidavit has been filed by the claimant. The counsel for the claimant-appellant submits before the Court that no such instructions or information about the compromise was given to him and he is ignorant of the fact that some compromise was arrived at between the parties. 9. The counsel for the claimant-appellant submits before the Court that no such instructions or information about the compromise was given to him and he is ignorant of the fact that some compromise was arrived at between the parties. 9. Hence, looking at the above that the matter has been settled fully and finally between the parties and amount has already been paid in compliance of the award and the intention of the parties was to give finality to the dispute and the fact of compromise has been withheld from the Court, the recalling of the order dated 27.9.2008 is justified. 10. In the result, this application is allowed and the judgment and order dated 27.9.2008 passed in S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1421/2007 is recalled and it is ordered that in terms of the agreement arrived at between the parties and submitted before the executing Court, the appeal against the impugned award is not maintainable, Consequently the appeal' being S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1421/2007 is dismissed as not maintainable.Application allowed. *******