National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Daulat Singh and Others

N.K. Mody, J.—Being aggrieved by the order dated 19.10.2001, passed by MACT, Shajapur, in Misc. Claim Case No. 115/2001, whereby the award dated 27.8.2001, passed by MACT, Shajapur, in Claim Case No. 25/2001, whereby a sum of Rs. 89,500 has been awarded along with interest @ 12% p.a. was modified and enhanced to Rs. 2,99,700, the present appeal has been filed.

Short facts of the case are that in a motor accident respondent No. 1 sustained grievous injuries and multiple fractures in left leg. Respondent No. 1 was hospitalized at Gandhi Hospital, Bhopal from 10.7.1997 to 17.8.1997, operation took place, rod was inserted and again respondent No. 1 was hospitalized from 14.5.1998 to 21.5.1998. Respondent No. 1 filed claim petition which was allowed and a sum of Rs. 89,500 has been awarded. The breakup of the amount awarded by the learned Tribunal is as under:

Rs. 4,500 towards medical expenses. Rs. 50,000 towards expenses incurred on attenders, hospital charges and other expenses. Rs. 25,000 towards premature retirement. Rs. 10,000 towards pains and sufferings.

After passing of the award on 27.8.2001 an application was filed u/s 152, C.P.C. on 3.9.2001, which was separately registered as Misc. Claim Case No. 115/2001 and was allowed vide order dated 19.10.2001, whereby the amount of award was enhanced from Rs. 89,500 to Rs. 2,99,700. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that after passing of the award the learned Tribunal had no jurisdiction to enhanced the award. It is submitted that the application was filed before the learned Tribunal was u/s 152, C.P.C. and the scope of the Court u/s 152, C.P.C. is limited. For the convenience Section 152 is reproduce here:

Section 152. Amendment of judgments, decrees or orders--Clerical or arithmetical mistakes in judgments, decrees or orders or errors arising therein from any accidental slip or omission may at any time be corrected by the Court either of its own motion or on the application of any of the parties.

Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Tribunal committed error in passing the order dated 19.10.2001. Learned Counsel further submits that even if it is assumed that application filed u/s 152, C.P.C. was rightly allowed by the learned Tribunal then too there is no justification for awarding the loss of income for the period of four years on account of premature retirement. It is submitted that even if it is found that respondent No. 1 was not in a position to discharge his duties on account of permanent disability and he was compelled to take premature retirement then too the amount which respondent No. 1 was to receive on account of pension for that period ought to have been deducted, which has not been done by learned Tribunal.

Mr. V.P. Saraf, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 submits that since there was arithmetical mistake, therefore, learned Tribunal has rightly corrected the award by the impugned award dated 19.10.2001.

From perusal of the award it is evident that learned Tribunal has assessed the income for the period when the appellant was retired forcibly at the rate of Rs. 4,900 per month for a period of four years, but while calculating the amount the mistake was committed, which has been corrected by the order passed on the application filed u/s 152 of the C.P.C. In the order of review it appears that there was a arithmetical mistake as learned Tribunal has calculated the amount as Rs. 2,35,200 (+) Rs. 10,000 (+) Rs. 50,000 (+) Rs. 4,500 (=) Rs. 2,99,700, which is also not correct. Since, the appellant was getting pension at the rate of Rs. 2,900 per month for the period when the appellant was retired forcibly. Therefore, this amount requires to be reduced from the amount which has been awarded to respondent No. 1. Similarly, the amount of Rs. 25,000, which has been awarded by the learned Tribunal towards premature retirement also requires to be reduced. The respondent No. 1 is entitled for the salary for the period of four years when he was forcibly retires at the rate of Rs. 4,900, after deducting a sum of Rs. 2,900 which he would receive towards pension, which comes to Rs. 2,000 per month. Thus respondent No. 1 is entitled for the following amount.

Rs. 96,000 towards salary for a period of four years after deducting pension Rs. 4,500 towards medical expenses. Rs. 50,000 towards expenses incurred on attenders and hospital charges etc. Rs. 10,000 towards pains and sufferings. Rs. 1,60,500 Total

With the aforesaid observations appeal stands disposed of. Vide interim order dated 10.7.2002, passed by this Court the part of the awarded amount is directed to be deposited in FDR. Upon moving appropriate application by the appellant or respondent No. I, the amount ordered by this Court be paid to respondent No. I and balance amount be paid to the appellant.