Gauhati High Court
New India Assurance Company Ltd vs Anowara Begum And 3 Ors on 25 May, 2022
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010199952018
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3324/2018
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD
CLUB ROAD, SILCHAR, PO-SILCHAR, DIST-CACHAR
VERSUS
ANOWARA BEGUM AND 3 ORS
W/O LATE JALAL UDDIN @ JALAL AHMED, R/O BOMONALI ROAD, WEST
KANISHAIL, PO-KANISHAIL, DIST-KARIMGANJ
2:KAMAL HUSSAIN (MINOR)
S/O LATE JALAL UDDIN @ JALAL AHMED
R/O BOMONALI ROAD
WEST KANISHAIL
PO-KANISHAIL
DIST-KARIMGANJ (BEING MINOR TO BE REPRESENTED BY HIS NATURAL
GUARDIAN HIS MOTHER OP1)
3:SAMUTRA BEGUM
W/O LATE NARMAR ALI @ ARZID ALI
R/O BOMONALI ROAD
WEST KANISHAIL
PO-KANISHAIL
DIST-KARIMGANJ
4:ABDUL KHALIQUE
S/O LATE JAMION ALI
R/O SILCHAR ROAD
ALONGJURI
KARIMGANJ
PO-SILCHAR ROAD
DIST-KARIMGANJ (OWNER/DRIVER
Page No.# 2/4
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S DUTTA
Advocate for the Respondent : G UDDIN
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
ORDER
Date : 25.05.2022
Heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Ms. P. Adhikari,
learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. P. Uddin, learned counsel appearing
on behalf of Mr. G. Uddin, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 1 and 2.
2. This interlocutory application has been filed for correction of error
appearing in the order dated 15.03.2018 passed by this Court in MACApp. No.
28/2014.
3. The learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has submitted that although
calculation was made in the order for loss of dependency, but the mandatory
requirement of making deduction of 1/3 of the income on account of personal
expenses after addition of future prospects is an error apparent on the face of
record, which is required to be corrected.
4. Upon instruction, the learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 1 and 2
submits that she has no objection as to the prayer made in this interlocutory
application.
5. Accordingly, in paragraph 15 of the judgment dated 15.03.2018 passed in
MACApp. No. 28/2014, the following would be deemed to have been
Page No.# 3/4
incorporated with the following words:
(i) On the quantum of compensation on
account of loss of dependency, amounting to Rs.8,06,400/-,
1/3 of the said amount is liable for deduction under the
head of personal expenses, which would come to
Rs.2,68,800/-. Hence the total amount on account of loss of
dependency would be Rs.5,37,600/-. However, there would
be no alteration in the quantum assessed towards loss of
consortium of Rs.40,000/-; loss of estate Rs.15,000/-;
funeral expenses Rs.50,000/-; less deduction Rs.50,000/-.
Therefore, the total compensation, as stands corrected by
this order would, now be Rs.6,07,600/- instead of
Rs.8,26,400/- as per judgment dated 15.03.2018 in
MACApp. 28/2014.
6. This order shall be read together with the judgment dated 15.03.2018
passed in MACApp. No. 28/2014.
7. The revised compensation in terms of this order shall be paid by the
applicant to the opposite party nos. 1 and 2 within the outer period of 4(four)
weeks. The learned instructing counsel for the applicant shall send the
downloaded copy of the order to the applicant authorities for releasing the
payment without insisting for a certified copy.
8. The learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 1 and 2 shall provide the
bank details to the learned counsel for the applicant for onwards transmission to
the applicant. In the alternative, it would be open to the applicant to deposit the
Page No.# 4/4
revised compensation before the Registry of this Court and the Registry shall
release the same to the opposite party no. 1 and 2, on being duly identified by
the learned counsel.
9. This I.A. stands allowed to the extent as indicated above.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
