Karnataka High Court
The Divisional Manager vs Smt. Savitri W/O Late Sidagouda Patil on 7 June, 2024
Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur
Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7654
RP No. 100036 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
REVIEW PETITION NO.100036 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY
LIMITED, CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI,
REP. THROUGH ITS REGIONAL OFFICE,
KALABURGI BHADRAPUR INFINITI,
2ND FLOOR, PINTO ROAD,
HUBBALLI-580020.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI NAGANGOUDA R. KUPPELUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. SAVITRI
W/O LATE SIDAGOUDA PATIL,
AGE: 58 YEARS,
BHARATHI
HM OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
Digitally signed by BHARATHI
R/O: BASTWAD, TQ: HUKKERI,
HM
Location: HIGH COURT OF
KARNATAKA DHARWAD
BENCH
DIST: BELAGAVI-591301.
Date: 2024.06.13 13:04:53
+0530
2. DEVENDRA
S/O SIDDAPPA MALAGE,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: BELLADABAGEWADI,
TQ: HUKKERI,
DIST: BELAGAVI-591301.
... RESPONDENTS
(R1-NOTICE SERVED;
R2-NOTICE DISPENSED WITH)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7654
RP No. 100036 of 2022
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1
READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908,
PRAYING TO REVIEW THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 11.06.2021,
MADE IN MFA NO.100042/2015, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the insurance company of the
offending vehicle which was involved in a road traffic
accident occurred on 10.01.2001, aggrieved by which the
claimant, who was the wife of the deceased, had filed a claim
petition in MVC No.792/2013 before the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal. The same came to be dismissed, which was
challenged before this Court in appeal in MFA
No.100042/2015 by the unfortunate widow of the deceased.
Upon appearance and arguments on merits, this Court
allowed the appeal, set aside the order of the tribunal and
awarded compensation to the claimant. Respondent No.2 in
the appeal is before this Court by virtue of a petition to
review the said order made in the appeal to the extent
stated in paragraph number 20 of the judgment of appeal,
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7654
wherein this Court has held, "There are three dependents,
namely wife and two minor children."
2. It is the contention of learned counsel for the
review petitioner that even according to the claimant, there
is only one claimant i.e., the widow of a deceased
Siddagouda Patil, who filed a claim petition and who was also
the appellant before the First Appeal Court in the first appeal
proceedings.
3. Under the circumstances, the submissions put
forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner appears to
have force and factually correct and the same will have to be
appreciated. The other contentions with regard to the
deduction made towards personal and living expenses of
1/3rd to be not correct cannot be appreciated in the review
petition. The same is negatived.
4. The review the petition is allowed only to the
extent that the observation made by this Court that in
paragraph No.20 of the judgment has to be read as "The
appellant is the sole claimant and dependent of the deceased
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7654
Siddagouda Patil", instead of "there are three dependents
namely, wife and two minor children". To that extent, this
review petition is allowed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
MRK
CT:BCK
