Smt. Sita Devi & Ors. v. MACT & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. The impugned order Annex.3 dated 9.4.2003 is set aside and the Tribunal is directed CW 2060/05 – Smt. Sita Devi & Ors. Vs. MACT & Ors. : Order dt.19.2.08 to correct the mistake in the aforesaid manner and…
Judgment
Mr. Manish Pitaliya for the petitioner. Mr. Jagdish Vyas for the respondents. ---------
Heard learned counsels. This petition has been filed by the petitioners aggrieved by order passed in application under Section 152 C.P.C. filed by the claimant before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal seeking correction of typographical error in the order dt.22.9.1999 which was rejected by the order dated 9.4.2003 (Annex.3).
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while net income of the deceased was computed at Rs.1600/- per month, the net annual income multiplying same by 12 (months) ought to have been taken at Rs.19,200/- but the Tribunal mistakenly on account of typographical error took the same at Rs.16,800/-. This mistake has been admitted by the Tribunal in the impugned order. Applying multiplier of 16 to the net annual income of Rs.19,200/ the compensation would have been Rs.3,07,200/- as stated in para 3 of CW 2060/05 – Smt. Sita Devi & Ors. Vs. MACT & Ors. : Order dt.19.2.08 the impugned order. However, to maintain the same amount, the compensation of Rs.2,68,800/- arrived by mistakenly taking the net annual income at Rs.16,800/-, the Tribunal chose to state in the impugned order that multiplier of 14 ought to have been taken instead of 16.
This approach of the Tribunal cannot be appreciated. The mistake apparent in the order allowing compensation to the claimant in the order dated 22.9.1999 was that net monthly income of Rs.1600/- was arrived at concessional and net income on that basis could be taken only at Rs.19,200/- and not at Rs.16,800. The compensation to be awarded thus, clearly came to Rs.3,07,200/- as admitted by the Tribunal in the impugned order and at Rs.2,68,800/-. Thereafter just to maintain the wrongly arrived at amount of compensation, and to cover up its mistake to shift the typographical error from multiplier of 16 to multiplier 14 is not understood. It was a simple typographical error which despite admitting the Tribunal failed to correct in the impugned order.
Operative part
Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. The impugned order Annex.3 dated 9.4.2003 is set aside and the Tribunal is directed CW 2060/05 – Smt. Sita Devi & Ors. Vs. MACT & Ors. : Order dt.19.2.08 to correct the mistake in the aforesaid manner and to award the compensation of Rs.3,07,200/- as per the correction in the figures in the order dt.22.9.1999 as aforesaid. The other part of award is maintained. No order as to costs. [ DR. VINEET KOTHARI ], J. item No.39 babulal/-
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 152.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Rajasthan High Court, on 19 Feb 2008. The bench was VINEET KOTHARI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.