Disposed

The Union of India v. Sri Govinda

Karnataka HC28 Mar 2024RP/17/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Railway's review petition against an MFA judgment awarding compensation for a 2011 railway death claim. Applying Supreme Court precedents enhancing compensation to Rs.8,00,000/- without interest, the court corrected its earlier order which had mistakenly awarded 12% interest.

What did the court decide?

Review allowed to the extent of correcting the judgment dated 12.06.2023: compensation limited to Rs.8,00,000/- with no interest.

The Union of India Vs Sri Govinda — Karnataka HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:12885 RP No. 17 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶7

REVIEW PETITION NO. 17 OF 2024 IN

¶8

M.F.A.No.5772/2016 (RTC)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN WESTERN RAILWAY, HUBLI-580020.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. AJAY PRABHU M., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

SRI GOVINDA

¶15

Digitally signed by SHARANYA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

S/O LATE SUBBEGOWDA @ SUBBANNA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT HOUSE NO.142, 2^ND CROSS, NEAR KALLAMMA THAYEE TEMPLE, HINAKAL, MYSORE 570006.

¶17

SRI NAGARAJ S/O LATE SUBBEGOWDA @ SUBBANNA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT HOUSE NO.1072, KODANGIKOPPALU, HOLENARASIPURA TOWN, HASSAN DISTRICT-573201.

¶18

SMT. CHANNAMMA W/O NAGANNA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC:12885 RP No. 17 of 2024

¶21

R/AT ARASIKERE TOWN, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577201.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI N.GOPLAKRISHNA, ADVOCATE)

¶24

THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE JUDGEMENT DATED 12.06.2023 IN MFA NO.5772 OF 2016 (RCT) PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶25

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

ORDER

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for review petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

¶28

Admittedly, the accident has occurred in the year 2011. At that time, the amount of compensation payable in an appeal filed against the dismissal of claim petition before the Railway Claims Tribunal was Rs.4,00,000/-. But, in view of the judgments of the Apex Court in UNION OF INDIA VS. RINA DEVI reported in (2019) 3 SCC 572 and RATHI MENON V/S. UNION OF INDIA reported in 2001 ACJ 721 (SC), compensation payable is enhanced to Rs.8,00,000/- against the dismissal of claim petition before the Railway Claims Tribunal.

¶29

¶30

NC: 2024:KHC:12885 RP No. 17 of 2024

¶31

However, this Court, vide order dated 12.06.2023 in M.F.A.No.5772/2016 in the operative portion of the judgment, by mistake mentioned that the appellants are entitled for compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- with interest at 12% p.a. Hence, in view of the judgments of the Apex Court referred supra, the question of awarding interest at 12% on the compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- does not arise and the appellants are entitled for only compensation at Rs.8,00,000/-.

¶32

Accordingly, the review petition is disposed of.

¶33

Sd/JUDGE

¶34

¶35

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47

The Union of India v. Sri Govinda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Union of India v. Sri Govinda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Ramachandra Vs Mr Y B Narayan

Smt Champa Nagaraj Vs Sri Nagaraju

Basavegowda @ Swamy Gowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Rajashekara B R Vs State of Karnataka

C Kempanna Vs Munichannarayappa

Smt Sajida Vs Smt Bibi Jan