IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR REVIEWPETITION No.- 5^ /2011 (For M.A.C. 889/2009, For Final Order) & lA APPLICANT r ^ €^€^ •^' y- v- y :- ^THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY f LIMITED, THROUGH DIVISIONAL MANAGER, (DIVISION NUMBER- 1), THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED., JAIL ROAD, RAIPUR, DISTRICT - RAIPUR (C.G.) ...-•*' ^ (INSURER OF TRUCK NUMBER C.G. 04 E - 9911) Vrs. NON-APPLICANTS:- r / 1. SMT. DULARI BAI W/0 LATE PURANIK CHANDRAKAR, AGE 55 YRS., OMPRAKASH S/0 PURANIK CHANDRAKAR, AGE 35 YRS. BOTH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE & POST PALOD, TAHSIL - ARANG, THANA - MANDIRHASOD, DISTRICT - RAIPUR (C.G.) SHISHUPAL S/0 AGANU RAM PAL, RESIDENT OF PARAGAON, POST - ARANG, THANA - ARANG, DISTRICT - RAIPUR (C.G.) (DRIVER OF TRUCK NUMBER C.G. 04 E- 9911) NARAYAN PRASAD PAL S/0 O.D.R. PAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE & POST PARAGAON, THANA - ARANG, DISTRICT - RAIPUR (C.G.) (OWNER OF TRUCK NUMBER C.G. 04 E.- 9911) REVIEW PETITION UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 CPC 1908 ^4^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CORAM: Hon'bleShri I.M. QuddusL J. & Hon'bie Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra, J. APPLICANT REVIEW PETITION No. 39 of 2011 The Oriental Insurance Company Limited. JNON-APPUCANTS Versus Smt. Dulari Bai and others. REVIEW PETITION UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 C.P.C.. 1908 L Shri SudhirAgrawal, counsel forthe appiicant. ORAL ORDER (15/09/2011) Following oral order of the Court was passed by 1. Quddusi. J, This review petition has been filed for modification of the amount of compensation. We have perused the impugned order. The deceased was getting Rs.7035/- per month as family pension. Had he been aljve, the family would have got a full pension but we had deducted 50% and loss of dependency was counted as Rs. 3,517.50/-. Besides this, agriculture income of Rs.5,000/- per month was found, but we have R<rt calculated agriculture income only to the extent of Rs.600/-, therefore, we have already deducted the standard deduction for personal and (iving expenses of the deceased and assessed the loss of dependency as Rs.4,000/- i.e. Rs.48,000/- per year and only multiplier 7 was applied. There is no error apparent on the face of record. No case for review is made out. Review Petition is accordingly dismjssed. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd//- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge ^