IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

I.A. N0.2 OF 2024

IN

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 43 OF 2022

Between:

Union of India, Represented by the General Manager, East Coast Railway, Bhubaneswar.

...Review Petitioner/Respondent

AND

• K.Vijayalaxmi, W/o.Late K.Tavitinaidu @ Tavudu, aged about ⁴⁵ Occ: Housewife, R/o.Kunajammana Pet Village Gonepadu Post, Sarubujjili Mandal, Srikakulam District, PIN-532 458 (AP). 1. years
• K.Syam Sundar, S/o.Late K.Tavitinaidu @ Tavudu, aged about ²⁷ years, Occ:Cultivation, R/o.Kunajammana Pet Village, Gonepadu Post, Sarubujjili Mandal, Srikakulam District, PIN-532 458 (AP). 2.
• K.Govinda Rao, S/o.Late K.Tavitinaidu @ Tavudu, aged about ²⁴ years, Occ.Private Job, R/o.Kunajammana Pet Village, Gonepadu Post, Sarubujjili Mandal, Sirkakulam District, PIN-532 458 (AP). 3.

4. K.Ravi, S/o.Late K.Tavitinaidu @ Tavudu, aged about ²² years, Occ: Private Employee R/o. Kunajammana Pet Village, Gonepadu Post, Sarubujjili Mandal, Srikakulam District, PIN-532 458 (AP).

...Respondents/Appellants

Petition under Section 114 of CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to Review the Orders passed by this Court in CMA No.43 of 2022 dated 21-12-2023.

Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri Pasala Ponna Rao (Central

Government Counsel)

Counsel for the Respondents : Ms.Geetha Madhuri N.S

The Court made the following ORDER:

The application is filed to review the order dated 21.12.2023 passed in the C.M.A and modify the Judgment.

2. Heard Mr. Pasala Ponna Rao, learned counsel for the review petitioner and Ms.Geetha Madhuri N.S., learned counsel for the respondent/petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the review petitioner would contend that the compensation is payable as applicable on the date of the incident with interest. In the instant case, the date of incident is on 24.06.2013. As such, the compensation should be as per the prescribed compensation as on the date of accident i.e Rs. 4,00,000/- along with reasonable rate of interest as per decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Union of India v. Rina Devi (2019) 3 see 572. Therefore, the appellants/ claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs. 7,77,6631- (taking base amount of compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/- with interest at 9% p.a), which the appellant/ claimant is entitled to. However, the

claimant is entitled to compensation of Rs. 8,00,000/- as per enhanced amount without any interest thereupon.

4. Perused the Judgment.

5. Learned counsel for the Review Petitioner placed on record the common order passed in I.A.No.1 of 2022 and I.A.No.2 of 2023 in C.M.A.No.1074 of 2018, wherein this Court at Para 8 held as follows:

"However, in a subsequent Judgment referred above, the Hon'ble Apex Court while considering the payment of interest and payment of enhanced compensation, was pleased to observe that:

In case of death in an accident which occurred before amendment, the basic figure would be Rs. 4,00,000/-. If after applying reasonable rate of interest, the final figure were to be less than Rs. 8,00,000/-, which was brought in by way of amendment, the claim would be entitled to Rs. 8,00,000/-If however, the amount of original compensation with rate of interest were to exceed the sum of Rs. 8,00,000/-, the compensation would be in terms of figure in excess of Rs. 8,00,000/-. The idea is to afford the benefit of the amendment to the extent possible".

6. No doubt, there is an error crept with regard to amount awarded by this Court and also interest part in the Judgment inadvertently. Therefore, the claimant/ petitioner is entitled to compensation of Rs. 8,00,000/- without any interest thereupon.

7. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the Review Petitioner, the operative portion of the order passed by this Court dated 21.12.2023 in C.M.A.No.43 of 2022 is modified as under:

"20. Following the decisions cited supra, this Court is inclined to allow the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, while setting aside the impugned judgment passed by the learned Tribunal dated 16.08.2021 passed in OA/II/U/233 of 2013. The petitioners are permitted to claim compensation of Rs. 8,00,000/-(Rupees Eight Lakhs Only) from the respondent in equal shares without furnishing any security.

21.With the above direction, the Civii Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed. The respondent is directed to deposit Eight Lakhs Only), within two (02) months from the date an amount of Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rupees of receipt of a copy of are permitted to withdraw the as per their shares in terms of the award, without furnishing any security. There shall be no order as to costs". this order. On such deposit, the appellants deposited amount.

9. Registry is directed to make necessary corrections in the said order and issue revised/amended copy of the order to the learned counsels.

Accordingly, the application is allowed.

SD/- V DIWAKAR DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//

SEgJlS^FFICER

To,

1. The Railway Claims Tribunal, Amaravathi Bench, Guntur.

2. One CC to Ms. Geetha Madhuri N S., Advocate [OPUC]

3. One CC to Sri Pasala Ponna Rao (Central Government Counsel) [OPUC]

4. The Section Officer, V.R. Section, High Court of A.P. at Amaravathi.

5. Three CD Copies

BSV

sree

HIGH COURT

DATED:27/09/2024

ORDER

IA No.2 OF 2024 in CMA.No.43 OF 2022

ALLOWING THE IA No.2 OF 2024