Taslim And Ors. vs Union Of India
2014 Latest Caselaw 1040 Del

*            IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                  FAO No.60/2013

%                                                      25th February, 2014

TASLIM AND ORS.                                          ..... Appellants
                          Through:       Mr. Anshuman Bal, Advocate.


                          Versus
UNION OF INDIA                                   ..... Respondent
                          Through:       None.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA

To be referred to the Reporter or not?


VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)

C.M. No.16879/2013 (restoration)

1.           For the reasons stated in the application, the appeal is restored

to its original number.


             C.M. stands disposed of.


+ FAO No.60/2013

2.           This first appeal is filed against the impugned order of the

Railway Claims Tribunal dated 17.10.2012 dismissing the prayer for



FAO No.60 /2013                                                     Page 1 of 3
 condonation of delay of about one year and six months in filing of the claim

petition.


3.          In law, condonation of delay has to be looked into with respect

to facts of each case, however, it is settled law that whenever there is a

provision of condonation of delay, delay is condoned unless the delay is

such which amounts to want of good faith or there is criminal negligence. In

fact, once an application is filed for condonation of delay, some amount of

negligence is implicit as so held by the Supreme Court in the case of N.

Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnamurthy AIR 1998 SC 3222.

4.          I am inclined to condone the delay in the facts of the present

case because I note that the deceased was only a labourer and therefore the

appellants/applicants would hardly have any financial means, and which is

given as a reason for approaching the Tribunal with delay. I also note that

all the applicants except the widow of the deceased are minor children and

therefore in a case such as the present where the persons concerned are

illiterate people who do not have financial resources and approach the Court

with delay, there is no reason why delay should not be condoned in view of

the ratio of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of N.

Balakrishnan (supra).      No benefit is derived to the applicants by

FAO No.60 /2013                                               Page 2 of 3
 approaching the Tribunal with delay and surely it is not easy for illiterate

people who are poor to have easy access to legal process and therefore there

are sufficient grounds for condonation of delay.

5.           Appeal is allowed and delay in filing of the petition before the

Railway Claims Tribunal is condoned.


6.           Railway Claims Tribunal will now decide the claim petition on

merits. Parties to appear before the Registrar of the Tribunal on 22 nd April,

2014. Registry to ensure that record is sent back to the Registrar for the date

fixed.




FEBRUARY 25, 2014                             VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.

Ne