Dyagala Uma Rani vs Komati Anil
2023 Latest Caselaw 825 Tel

        THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

                         C.R.P.No. 2703 of 2022

ORDER:

This Civil Revision Petition is filed aggrieved by the order

passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge,

Kamareddy, in I.A.No.612 of 2022 in O.P.No.77 of 2018 dated

14.10.2022.

2. The revision petitioners/claimants filed the aforesaid

I.A.No.612 of 2022 under Order 47 Rule 1 C.P.C. seeking to

review the judgment and decree, dated 11.04.2022, passed in

O.P.No.77 of 2018. It is stated that the Tribunal has taken the age

of the deceased as 47 years on the date of accident, but the

Tribunal had erroneously applied the multiplier '12' instead of

'13' which is applicable to the age of the deceased as per the

judgment of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma & others Vs. Delhi

Transport Corporation & another1. If the same is applied, the

total loss of dependency works out to Rs.30,97,331/- {Loss of

dependency to the family of the deceased i.e., Rs.2,38,256/- X

(2009) (6) SCC 121

'13' (Multiplier)}. However, the Claims Tribunal by oversight

awarded Rs.20,25.000/- under the head of loss of dependency.

Hence, the petitioners requested the Court to review of the

judgment and decree of the Tribunal.

3. The Claims Tribunal, by docket order, dated 14.09.2022,

dismissed the said application holding that the amount of

compensation awarded by the Tribunal is higher than the

amount claimed by the petitioners/claimants and that the

petition for review is a belated one.

4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid docket order, the

petitioners/claimants preferred the present revision, inter alia,

contending that the Claims Tribunal has committed material

illegality and irregularity in dismissing the application filed by

the petitioners for review of the judgment and decree dated

11.04.2022 passed in O.P.No.77 of 2018 and that there is a

typographical error in calculation of the loss of dependency and

also in applying the correct multiplier. Therefore, the petitioners

requested this Court to set aside the impugned docket order of

the Claims Tribunal and review the judgment and decree of the

Tribunal passed in O.P.No.77 of 2018.

5. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on either side and

perused the record.

6. A perusal of the judgment of the Claims Tribunal passed

in O.P.No.77 of 2018 dated 11.04.2018 would disclose that there

is an error apparent on the face of record regarding application

of appropriate multiplier and computation of loss of dependency

to the family of the deceased.

7. In the instant case, the deceased was aged 47 years on the

date of accident. The Claims Tribunal has applied the multiplier

of '12' for arriving at loss of dependency to the family of the

deceased. However, as per the guidelines laid down by the Apex

Court in Sarla Verma's case (1 supra) for the age group of 46 to

50 years, the correct multiplier to be applied is '13'. The

Tribunal, in my view, has erred in not applying the correct

multiplier to arrive at loss of dependency to the family of the

deceased. Applying the multiplier of '13' to the loss of

dependency of Rs.2,38,256/- per annum, as fixed by the Claims

Tribunal, the total loss of dependency to the family would come

to Rs.30,97,331/- [(Rs.2,38,256/- X '13' (Multiplier)]. The rest of

the amounts awarded, under the other heads i.e., Rs.15,000/-

towards funeral expenses and Rs.2,00,000/- towards loss of

consortium, by the Claims Tribunal shall remain unaltered.

Thus, the petitioners/claimants are entitled to total

compensation of Rs.33,12,331/- towards compensation.

8. Accordingly, the C.R.P. is allowed by setting aside the

impugned order, dated 14.10.2022, passed in I.A.No.612 of 2022.

Further, the judgment and decree, dated 11.04.2022, passed in

O.P.No.77 of 2018 is modified by enhancing the compensation

amount awarded by the Tribunal from Rs.22,40,000/- to

Rs.33,12,331/-, payable by respondents 1 to 3 jointly and

severally. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 7.5% per

annum from the date of order passed by the Tribunal till the date

of realization. Respondent No.3 is directed to deposit the

amount along with accrued interest within a period of two

months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The

enhanced amount shall be apportioned among the petitioners/

claimants in the same proportion in which original

compensation amounts were directed by the Tribunal. Further,

the claimants are directed to pay Deficit Court Fee on the

enhanced amount. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand

closed.

_______________________ JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

17.02.2023 Gsn