Mr. Naveen Kapoor Advocate Vs. Boinder Nath Nakshi and Others …..Respondents. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1162181
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnAug-20-2014
AppellantMr. Naveen Kapoor Advocate
RespondentBoinder Nath Nakshi and Others …..Respondents.
Excerpt:
cm no.11403-cii of 2014 in/and -1- ra-cr no.119-cii of 2014 in fao no.737 of 1996 in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh cm no.11403-cii of 2014 in/and ra-cr no.119-cii of 2014 in fao no.737 of 1996 (o&m) date of decision: 20.08.2014. smt. sushma sahni and others ……appellants. versus boinder nath nakshi and others …..respondents. coram: hon’ble ms.justice navita singh present: mr.r.c.kapoor, advocate, for the applicant/appellants. mr.naveen kapoor, advocate, for the non-applicant/respondent no.3 (oriental fire and general insurance company limited).navita singh, j. cm no.11403-cii of 2014 this is an application for condonation of delay of 10 days in filing the application for review by way of ra-cr no.119-cii of 2014. there is no serious objection from the other side. in view of the grounds stated in the civil miscellaneous application and the affidavit, the same is allowed and the delay of 10 days in filing the review application stands condoned. ra-cr no.119-cii of 2014 no separate reply has been filed by the non- applicant/respondent no.3, but the application is contested. the backdrop of the matter is that an award was passed on 17.02.1995 by the motor accident claims tribunal, ambala, granting malik ramesh 2014.08.20 16:50 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh cm no.11403-cii of 2014 in/and -2- ra-cr no.119-cii of 2014 in fao no.737 of 1996 compensation on account of death of vipin kumar sahni, who was husband of appellant no.1, father of appellants no.2 and 3 and son of the other appellants. for his death, the compensation granted was rs.3,84,000/- and compensation for damage of truck was rs.50,000/-. the appellants came up in appeal for enhancement. during appeal, the father of the deceased, i.e.appellant sohan lal, died as stated by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants. the appeal was decided by this court on 26.02.2014 enhancing the compensation on account of death of vipin kumar sahni from the amount already awarded to rs.6,04,800/-. however, the compensation given for damage to the truck was not altered. learned counsel for the appellants argued that the income of the deceased was assessed at rs.3,000/- per month, but future prospects were granted to the tune of 30% though the age of the deceased was 38 years and not between 40 to 50 years as held. accordingly, 50% should have been added towards future prospects. dependency of the deceased himself was also taken to be 1/4th and the calculation on that count was incorrect. nothing was awarded towards funeral expenses, loss of consortium and loss of love and affection. this argument was on the lines of the grounds pleaded in the review application. at the time of arguments, learned counsel further contended that the income of the deceased should have been assessed at least at rs.4,000/- per month if not rs.6,000/- as pleaded by the appellants. he went on to argue that even the malik ramesh 2014.08.20 16:50 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh cm no.11403-cii of 2014 in/and -3- ra-cr no.119-cii of 2014 in fao no.737 of 1996 amount regarding damage of the truck was insufficiently granted by the tribunal, but it was not enhanced in the judgment in question. learned counsel for respondent no.3 countered the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellants on the submissions that the income was rightly assessed and so was the damage to the truck. regarding compensation towards loss of consortium and loss of love and affection and funeral expenses etc., i.e.conventional head, he stated that the court may pass any order as it may deem fit. if the contention on behalf of the appellants is considered, the result would be hearing the appeal de novo and passing a fresh judgment because the appellants are seeking enhancement in the amount of compensation on all counts. it is felt that the scope of reviewing the judgment is limited and the relief, if any, to be granted to the appellants can only be covered under the words, “or for any other sufficient reason”. as given in sub-rule (1) of rule 1 of order 47 of the code of civil procedure. so far as the income of the deceased is concerned, the same does not require any reconsideration, nor does the cut in the income on account of expenditure on the deceased himself. so far as the future prospects are concerned, it is categorically mentioned in the judgment that learned counsel for the appellants had wanted 30% of the income of the deceased to be added as future prospects and so was done. it is rightly and fairly pointed out by learned counsel for the malik ramesh 2014.08.20 16:50 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh cm no.11403-cii of 2014 in/and -4- ra-cr no.119-cii of 2014 in fao no.737 of 1996 applicant/appellants that adding 30% of actual income towards future prospects, the annual income of the deceased would come to rs.35,100/- and not rs.37,800/- as mentioned in the judgment. this mistake is apparent on the face of record and is liable to be corrected. the income of the deceased is, therefore, to be taken rs.35,100/- per annum and applying the multiplier of 16, the amount of compensation based on the income of the deceased will, therefore, come to rs.5,61,600. the mistake is corrected accordingly. regarding loss of consortium and loss of love and affection and funeral expenses etc., a consolidated amount of rs.1,50,000/- is awarded and the total amount of compensation on account of death of vipin kumar sahni will now be rs.7,11,600/-. no other point needs reconsideration from the angle of review. the review application is disposed of accordingly. (navita singh) judge2008.2014 ramesh malik ramesh 2014.08.20 16:50 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh
Judgment:

CM No.11403-CII of 2014 in/and -1- RA-CR No.119-CII of 2014 in FAO No.737 of 1996 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM No.11403-CII of 2014 in/and RA-CR No.119-CII of 2014 in FAO No.737 of 1996 (O&M) Date of decision: 20.08.2014.

Smt.

Sushma Sahni and others ……Appellants.

Versus Boinder Nath Nakshi and others …..Respondents.

CORAM: HON’BLE Ms.JUSTICE NAVITA SINGH Present: Mr.R.C.Kapoor, Advocate, for the applicant/appellants.

Mr.Naveen Kapoor, Advocate, for the non-applicant/respondent No.3 (Oriental Fire and General Insurance Company Limited).NAVITA SINGH, J.

CM No.11403-CII of 2014 This is an application for condonation of delay of 10 days in filing the application for review by way of RA-CR No.119-CII of 2014.

There is no serious objection from the other side.

In view of the grounds stated in the civil miscellaneous application and the affidavit, the same is allowed and the delay of 10 days in filing the review application stands condoned.

RA-CR No.119-CII of 2014 No separate reply has been filed by the non- applicant/respondent No.3, but the application is contested.

The backdrop of the matter is that an award was passed on 17.02.1995 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambala, granting Malik Ramesh 2014.08.20 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CM No.11403-CII of 2014 in/and -2- RA-CR No.119-CII of 2014 in FAO No.737 of 1996 compensation on account of death of Vipin Kumar Sahni, who was husband of appellant No.1, father of appellants No.2 and 3 and son of the other appellants.

For his death, the compensation granted was Rs.3,84,000/- and compensation for damage of truck was Rs.50,000/-.

The appellants came up in appeal for enhancement.

During appeal, the father of the deceased, i.e.appellant Sohan Lal, died as stated by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants.

The appeal was decided by this Court on 26.02.2014 enhancing the compensation on account of death of Vipin Kumar Sahni from the amount already awarded to Rs.6,04,800/-.

However, the compensation given for damage to the truck was not altered.

Learned counsel for the appellants argued that the income of the deceased was assessed at Rs.3,000/- per month, but future prospects were granted to the tune of 30% though the age of the deceased was 38 years and not between 40 to 50 years as held.

Accordingly, 50% should have been added towards future prospects.

Dependency of the deceased himself was also taken to be 1/4th and the calculation on that count was incorrect.

Nothing was awarded towards funeral expenses, loss of consortium and loss of love and affection.

This argument was on the lines of the grounds pleaded in the review application.

At the time of arguments, learned counsel further contended that the income of the deceased should have been assessed at least at Rs.4,000/- per month if not Rs.6,000/- as pleaded by the appellants.

He went on to argue that even the Malik Ramesh 2014.08.20 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CM No.11403-CII of 2014 in/and -3- RA-CR No.119-CII of 2014 in FAO No.737 of 1996 amount regarding damage of the truck was insufficiently granted by the Tribunal, but it was not enhanced in the judgment in question.

Learned counsel for respondent No.3 countered the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellants on the submissions that the income was rightly assessed and so was the damage to the truck.

Regarding compensation towards loss of consortium and loss of love and affection and funeral expenses etc., i.e.conventional head, he stated that the Court may pass any order as it may deem fit.

If the contention on behalf of the appellants is considered, the result would be hearing the appeal de novo and passing a fresh judgment because the appellants are seeking enhancement in the amount of compensation on all counts.

It is felt that the scope of reviewing the judgment is limited and the relief, if any, to be granted to the appellants can only be covered under the words, “or for any other sufficient reason”.

as given in Sub-rule (1) of Rule 1 of Order 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

So far as the income of the deceased is concerned, the same does not require any reconsideration, nor does the cut in the income on account of expenditure on the deceased himself.

So far as the future prospects are concerned, it is categorically mentioned in the judgment that learned counsel for the appellants had wanted 30% of the income of the deceased to be added as future prospects and so was done.

It is rightly and fairly pointed out by learned counsel for the Malik Ramesh 2014.08.20 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CM No.11403-CII of 2014 in/and -4- RA-CR No.119-CII of 2014 in FAO No.737 of 1996 applicant/appellants that adding 30% of actual income towards future prospects, the annual income of the deceased would come to Rs.35,100/- and not Rs.37,800/- as mentioned in the judgment.

This mistake is apparent on the face of record and is liable to be corrected.

The income of the deceased is, therefore, to be taken Rs.35,100/- per annum and applying the multiplier of 16, the amount of compensation based on the income of the deceased will, therefore, come to Rs.5,61,600.

The mistake is corrected accordingly.

Regarding loss of consortium and loss of love and affection and funeral expenses etc., a consolidated amount of Rs.1,50,000/- is awarded and the total amount of compensation on account of death of Vipin Kumar Sahni will now be Rs.7,11,600/-.

No other point needs reconsideration from the angle of review.

The review application is disposed of accordingly.

(NAVITA SINGH) JUDGE2008.2014 Ramesh Malik Ramesh 2014.08.20 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh