Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(CHH) 952
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCC No. 16 of 2023 The Tata A.I.G. General Insurance Company Limited Through The Branch Manager, Branch Office, 2nd Floor, Lalganga Shopping Mall, G.E. Road, Raipur, Post Office Raipur, Police Station Gol Bazar, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant Versus
1. Smt. Jeera Bai Diwan W/o Late Tukeram Diwan, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Ambedkar Chowk, Gidiyari Raipur, Post Office Raipur, Police Station Gudiyari Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2. Lekhram Diwan S/o Late Tukeram Diwan, Aged About 17 Years Minor Through Legal Guardian Mother Smt. Jeera Bai Diwan, Respondent No.1, R/o Ambedkar Chowk, Gudiyari Raipur, Post Office Raipur, Police Station Gudiyari Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
3. Ku. Durga Diwan D/o Late Tukeram Diwan, Aged About 15 Years Minor Through Legal Guardian Mother Smt. Jeera Bai Diwan, Respondent No.1, R/o Ambedkar Chowk, Gudiyari Raipur, Post Office Raipur, Police Station Gudiyari Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
4. Ramesh Kumar Nirmalkar S/o Late Harakhram Nirmalkar, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Near Santoshi Mandir, Chhura, Police Station And Post Office Chhura, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
Order On Board
07.02.2023
1. Heard on I.A. No.01/22 which is an application for condonation of delay in filing of MCC.
2. On due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and also taking note of the fact that the delay is of only 31 days, I.A. No.01 is allowed and the delay of 31 days in filing MCC stands condoned.
3. With the consent of the parties the MCC was heard on merits.
4. The present MCC has been filed seeking for correction/modification of the clerical error that occurred in the course of quantification of compensation while deciding MAC No.525/2017 which stood decided on 17.10.2022.
5. Learned counsel for applicant drew attention of this Court to the calculation reflected in paragraph no.5 wherein the Tribunal had accepted the monthly income of deceased at Rs.4,500/- which brings the annual income at Rs.54,000/-. If 25% of it is added towards future prospects, the yearly income would come to Rs.67,500/-. Since 1/3rd of the said amount was to be deducted towards personal expenses, after deduction of 1/3rd i.e. Rs.22,500/- from Rs.67,500/- it would come to Rs.45,000/- instead of Rs.49,500/- as quantified by this Court, which was due to a clerical error. The said amount of Rs.45,000/- if multiplied applying the multiplier of 13 would bring the total amount to Rs.5,85,000/- instead of Rs.6,42,500/- as quantified in the impugned order. Counsel for applicant submits that rest of the compensation awarded would remain intact and after correction as mentioned above the total compensation would come to Rs.7,45,000/- instead of Rs.8,03,500/- as mentioned in the order of MAC No.525/2017.
6. The modification sought for is only on account of the clerical error that has been reflected in the order so far as the erroneous deduction of the amount of 1/3rd towards personal expenses that has been made from the yearly income.
7. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/claimants does not oppose the request of the learned counsel for the Insurance Company in seeking for appropriate correction in the order to the extent indicated hereinabove.
8. In view of the same, the present MCC deserves to be and is accordingly allowed. It is ordered that the total compensation payable by the Insurance Company to the claimants would now stand modified to Rs.7,45,000/- instead of Rs.8,03,500/- as ordered in MAC
525/2017. The other parts of the impugned order shall remain intact.
9. The MCC stands allowed and disposed off.
