Calcutta High Court
FMA/56/2026 of UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs SHEFALI@SHEPHALI RABIDAS AND ORS on 20 August 2026
Court No.8 Item No.01(SL) (nb/sg) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
21.08.2026
Court No.8
Item No.01(SL)
(nb/sg)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI
FMA 33 of 2023
Shefali @ Shephali Rabidas & Ors.
versus
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.
With
FMA 56 of 2026
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.
Vs.
Shefali @ Shephali Rabidas & Ors.
Mr. Gobinda Saha,
Ms. Srija Bhowmik,
….for the appellants(In FMA 33 of 2023).
…for the respondents (In FMA 56 of 2026).
Mr. Kalipada Das,
…. For the respondent no.2
Mr. Rishin Chakraborty,
…. For the Insurance Company.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Respondent no.1 is represented.
2. Matter is taken up for hearing as day’s list on the prayer made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as some inadvertent typographical error has crept in the judgment passed on August 20, 2026.
3. The correction required on submitted by the learned advocate representing the appellant are as follows:
(i) In paragraph 24 the amount has been mentioned as total of Rs.10,10,50,150(15,06,250- 4,46,100) when it ought to have been Rs.15,06,250/- out of which the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.4,46,100/-.
4. Further submission made that the outer limit of making such payment to the claimant is not mentioned in paragraph 25 which needs to be incorporated.
5. Heard, considered. The total amount mentioned in paragraph 23 it is found to be incorrectly typed in paragraph 24, and the same is required to be corrected. Hence, Paragraph 24 to be as read follows: “24. Hence the claimants are entitled to Rs.15,50,150/- when the Tribunal awarded Rs.4,56,100/- along with an interest at the rate of Rs.9% from the date of filing of the claim application that is from 29th January, 2021 to be awarded in favour of the claimants, since the victim passed away in the year 2020 and the claimants are pursuing with their claim till 2026”.
6. On going through paragraph 25 it is seen that no stipulated time period is mentioned for making the payment as it has been inadvertently omitted. Hence paragraph 25 to be read as follows: “Since no payment is made in terms of the award passed by issuing cheques in favour of the claimants within a period of six weeks before the learned Tribunal from this date. Therefore, default clause will remain operative till realization or issuing cheques in favour of the claimant.
7. Let the above corrections be made a part of the Judgment dated August 20, 2026.
8. Other portion of the judgment will remain unaltered.
9. All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Chaitali Chatterjee(Das), J.)