R.K.RASTOGI,J. - (1.) ALL these applications have arisen out of a common judgment and order dated 6th July, 2005 passed in F.A.F.O. Nos. 665, 666, 667, 668, 669, 670 and 671 of 2001 and Cross Appeal Nos. 202203, 202202,202197, 202198, 202199, 202200 and 202201 of 2004. Since a common law point is involved in all these review applications; we have heard them together and are deciding them by a common order.
(2.) THE relevant facts of these cases have been stated by us in our judgment dated 6th July, 2005 delivered in the aforesaid F.A.F.Os. and cross-appeals. It may be mentioned that a Maruti Van had met with an accident on 15th May, 1999. All the occupants of the Van, who were bachelors, had died on the spot. Their heirs, who are their parents, etc., filed claim petitions. Taking into consideration the respective income of the deceased persons as well as this fact that they were bachelors, dependency of the claimants was assessed to be 1/3rd of their income; and according to the age of the claimants appropriate multipliers were applied. The only ground on which the review has been sought is that there should have been only 1/3rd deduction in respect of the expenses of the deceased and dependency of the claimants should have been assessed to be 2/3rd of their income and not 1/3rd (as was done in the above judgment) and so this judgment and order should be reviewed. We have heard Mr. Piyush Mishra for the applicants and Mr. V.C. Dixit for the opposite party, Insurance Company.
(3.) THE learned Counsel for the applicants cited before us a ruling of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Giyan Chand Jain and Anr. v. Permanand and Ors. reported in I (2003) ACC 149 (SC) : 2003 (1) TAC 490 (SC) and contended that in this case an unmarried person aged about 26 years had died and age of the father and the mother was 55 and 48 years respectively and in this case after deduction of 1/3rd income towards personal expenses of the deceased, the remaining 2/3rd income of the deceased was determined as loss of dependency It was contended that in view of this ruling of the Hon'ble Apex Court, only 1/3rd deduction should have been made in respect of the income of the deceased persons and the remaining 2/3rd portion of their income should have been awarded as compensation after applying appropriate multiplier.;