RA-CR-50-2025 in FAO-433-1993 [1] 105 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RA-CR-50-2025 in FAO-433-1993 Date of decision: 25.04.2025 Pinglu Devi (D) through LRs ...Appellant Versus Union of India and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL Present: Mr. Vinod K. Kataria, Advocate for the review applicant-appellant. Mr. Rakesh Sobti, Advocate and Mr. Harinder Pal Singh, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2. **** VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL) 1. This is review petition filed under Section 114 of CPC read with Section 151 of CPC for review of the order/judgment dated 09.04.2025. 2. Learned counsel for the review applicant-appellant has submitted that he would limit his review application only to one issue i.e., apportionment of the additional amount of compensation awarded. It is submitted that inadvertently, at the time of passing of the order, it could not be pointed out that the claimant-Pinglu Devi had died and her legal heirs have been brought on record and thus, the additional amount of compensation was required to be distributed to the legal representatives of Pinglu Devi. It is submitted that Pinglu Devi had one daughter Geeta Devi who was shown as legal representative No.(I) and it is prayed that 50% of the additional amount of compensation along with accrued interest be granted to her. It is further submitted that Pinglu Devi also had a son who had also died and LR Nos.(II) PAWAN KUMAR 2025.04.28 18:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document RA-CR-50-2025 in FAO-433-1993 [2] to (V) are the sons and daughter of the said son and it is prayed that the said LR Nos.(II) to (V) be granted the balance 50% of the additional amount of compensation along with accrued interest in equal proportion. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2-contesting respondents has submitted that they have no objection to the said apportionment. 4. Keeping in view the abovesaid facts and circumstances and the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the review applicant-appellant, the present review application is partly allowed to the limited extent that the additional amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.2,26,700/- along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual payment would be apportioned as under:- i) Geeta Devi daughter of Pinglu Devi would be given 50% of the additional amount of compensation along with accrued interest. ii) Satish Kumar, Saroop Chand, Daulat Ram and Sudha Devi would be given 50% of the additional amount of compensation along with accrued interest in equal proportion. 5. It is relevant to note and is also clarified that the plea raised by the review applicant/appellant in the review application to the effect that the rate of interest also be increased is not pressed and thus, interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum is upheld. 25.04.2025 (VIKAS BAHL) Pawan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No PAWAN KUMAR 2025.04.28 18:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document