Dismissed

Reeta Singh W/O Late Shri V.S. Singh v. Deen Dayal Pal S/O Shri Radhey Shyam Pal

Rajasthan HC1 Mar 2024CRW/9/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Rajasthan dismissed a civil review petition filed to challenge a motor accident claim award. The court held the review not maintainable as the prior judgment had already stipulated that income tax be deducted from the award amount to determine the net payable sum, addressing the petitioner's grievance.

What did the court decide?

Review Petition dismissed as not maintainable; delay in filing condoned.

Reeta Singh W/O Late Shri V.S. Singh Vs Deen Dayal… — Motor Accident Claims | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:10814]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Review Petition No. 9/2024

¶4

Reeta Singh W/o Late Shri V.s. Singh, R/o 20A, Heera Bagh, Police Station, Moti Doongri, Jaipur

¶5

Smt. Ekta Singh D/o Late Shri V.s. Singh, R/o A-16, Pawan Vihar, Jagatpura, Jaipur

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

Deen Dayal Pal S/o Shri Radhey Shyam Pal, R/o Sf-2, Gayatri Nagar, Ward No. 14, Police Station Shipra Path, District Jaipur (Driver And Owner Car No. Rj-14-Cm1341)

¶9

National Insurance Company Ltd., Through Manager, M.i. Road, Jaipur

¶10

Smt. Ankita D/o Late Shri V.s. Singh W/o Shri Aren William Matcaf, R/o Unit No. 707, 27, Hill Road, West Worth Pilet Nsw 2127

¶11

Shri Uma Shankar Singh S/o Late Shri Ramkare Singh, R/o Village And Post Tejpura, P.o. Indore, District Ghazipur, U.p

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Singh Bhati For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.N. Tiwari

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

¶15

Order

¶16

01/03/2024

¶17

The matter comes up on an application No.531/2024 filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay in filing the review petition.

¶18

For the reasons mentioned in the application the same is allowed. Delay in filing the review petition is condoned.

(2 of 3)

[CRW-9/2024]

[2024:RJ-JP:10814]

This review petition has been filed against the judgment dated 31.10.2023 passed by this Court in Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1013/2016 titled as Reeta Singh and Ors. versus Deen Dayal Pal and Ors.

¶23

In the review petition it has been mentioned that learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.1, Jaipur, Metro in Claim Petition No.209/2013, passed an award on 03.12.2015 of Rs.61,65,400/- along with the interest @6% per annum, against which the claimants filed the appeal being S.B. Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1013/2016.

¶24

This Court while allowing the appeal, enhanced the amount from Rs.61,65,400 to Rs.1,15,03,244 along with interest @8% per annum. It has also been mentioned that as the annual income of the deceased comes within the taxable range, therefore, income tax was also required to be deducted for determination of actual salary. It is submitted that since this Court did not pass any order regarding the deduction of income tax, and thus, the impugned judgment dated 31.10.2023 may be reviewed. Therefore, the review petition may be allowed accordingly.

¶25

Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶26

This Court while allowing the S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.1013/2016 vide order dated 31.10.2023 passed the following order:

¶27

"rnuqlkj ;g vihy vkaf’kd :i ls Lohdkj dh tkdj fo}ku v/khuLFk vf/kdj.k }kjk ikfjr iapkV ftlds }kjk

[2024:RJ-JP:10814]

[CRW-9/2024]

(3 of 3)

fd vihykFkhZx.k@DysesaV~l dks 61]65]400@& :i;s fnyok;s tkus dk vkns'k ikfjr fd;k x;k gS] ds LFkku ij 1]15]03]244@& :i;s dk iapkV ikfjr fd;k tkrk gSA vihykFkhZx.k dks ns; jkf'k ij fu;ekuqlkj vk;dj dVkSrh dh tkosxhA vihykFkhZx.k }kjk iwoZ esa izkIr dh x;h jkf’k dks iapkV jkf’k esa ls lek;ksftr fd;k tkdj 'ks"k jkf’k vihykFkhZx.k izkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh ik;s tkrs gSaA

¶32

bl vkns'k }kjk c<kbZ xbZ {kfriwfrZ jkf'k ij ;kfpdk nk;j djus dh frfFk ls vihykFkhZx.k] 8 izfr'kr okf"kZd C;kt izkIr djus ds vf/kdkjh gSaA"

¶33

It is clear from the above order that this Court has specifically mentioned that on the amount payable to the appellants the Income tax is to be deducted as per rules. This means that respondents are under obligation to deduct income tax before making the payment of the awarded amount, as per the prevailing income tax rules for the time being in force.

¶34

As this Court has already ordered the deduction of income tax, therefore, this review petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed.

¶35

Accordingly, this review petition is dismissed as not maintainable.

¶36

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J

¶37

TANISHA /341-S

Reeta Singh W/O Late Shri V.S. Singh v. Deen Dayal Pal S/O Shri Radhey Shyam Pal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reeta Singh W/O Late Shri V.S. Singh v. Deen Dayal Pal S/O Shri Radhey Shyam Pal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Fakruddin @ Fakru Son of Jassu Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Imilal S/O Shri Bhomaram Vs Ramniwas S/O Shri Krishan Lal

Rakesh Kumar S/O Shri Gyarsilal, Vs Manoj Kumar S/O Banwarilal Jangid

Mahendra Singh Rajawat S/O Bhanwar Singh Vs Chhitar Lal S/O Ladu Lal

Mohanlal Vs New Iindia Insurance

Prakash Meena Vs New India Insurance