← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhREVP/22/2018allowed

Shrimati Kamla Bai v. Bishahuram

2018-03-06Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Review Petition No. 22 of 2018 Shrimati Kamla Bai W/o Sunder Lal Satnami, aged about 50 years, R/o Village Dhabapar, Tahsil Nawagarh, District Durg, Chhattisgarh (So called claimant) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Bishahuram S/o Late Mukut Ram, aged about 40 years, R/o Village Dhabapar, Police Station Nandghat, Tahsil Navagarh, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

2. Kanhaiya S/o Guha Ram Satnami, aged about 40 years, R/o Village Navapara Shakti Ward, Bhatapara, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Driver)

3. Atul S/o K. K. Mundda R/o Mandi Road, Bhatapara, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Owner)

4. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited through Branch Manager, Branch Office, near Rajeev Plaza, Bus Stand, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh (Insurer) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri R. K. Pali, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 06/03/2018 Present review petition has been filed seeking for a correction in the order dated 19.01.2018 passed by this Court in MAC No.1049 firstly to the extent that this Court has not referred to interest part on the enhanced amount and secondly for a correction in the cause title where the name of the counsel for respondent no.4 has been wrongly typed.

2.

Both these grounds seem to be an error on the face of record. The learned Tribunal while allowing the claim application originally has granted 6%

interest on the awarded amount. The said order was under challenge in the appeal which stood allowed vide order dated 19.01.2018 in MAC No. 1049/2011. This Court has enhanced the awarded amount form Rs.2,48,000/- to Rs.4,06,000/-. However, this Court has not mentioned anything in respect of the interest that would accrue on the enhanced amount.

3.

Needless to mention that it is implied that the interest on the enhanced amount would be the same as has been awarded by the Tribunal. The order passed by this Court is very clear that only the awarded amount has been modified and the rest of the award including the distribution and the interest part would be the same as has been decided by the Tribunal. 4.

So far as the correction in the cause title is concerned, the order dated 19.01.2018 stands modified to the extent that in stead of Shri P. P. Sahu, advocate for respondent no.4, Shri S. P. Sahu, advocate for respondent no.4 shall be read.

5.

Accordingly, the review petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE Bhola