Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Pooja Singh vs Union Of India on 28 February, 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH
ON THE 28 th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. APPEAL No. 5434 of 2019
BETWEEN:-
1. SMT. POOJA SINGH W/O LATE SHRI SATYARAJ
SINGH, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/O GRAM
BHAINSWAR, THANA KOTI, DISTT. SATNA (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. KU.TANVI D/O LATE SATYARAJ SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 4 YEARS, OCCUPATION: MINOR
THROUGH NATURAL GUARDIAN HER MOTHER
SMT.POOJA SINGH GRAM BHAINSWAR THANA
KOTI (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. SMT.KESHKALI SINGH W/O LATE KRISHNA
BAHADUR SINGH, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, GRAM
BHAINSWAR THANA KOTI (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY MS. APARNA SINGH - ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANTS)
AND
UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS GENERAL MANAGER
WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY, JABALPUR (M.P.) (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY MS. KANAK GAHARWAR - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT)
This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
T his miscellaneous appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims
Tribunal Act, 1987 is preferred feeling dissatisfied with the judgment dated
29.07.2019 in case No.OA/llu/BPL/2016/127 by Railway Claims Tribunal,
Bhopal, Bench Bhopal for enhancement of award of compensation to the tune
of Rs.2,50,000/-.
2. Claim under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 was
preferred for the untoward incident dated 03.12.2015 in which Satyraj Singh
died due to injuries sustained in an accidental fall from train at Satna Railway
Station by sudden movement of train with a jerk. A total compensation of
Rs.8,00,000/- was awarded and this appeal has been preferred seeking interest
@ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition i.e. 24.03.2016.
3. Record is not available but issue involved does not require the record.
4. Both the parties are heard finally.
5. Respondent opposed the prayer submitting that date of accident is
03.12.2015 and that is prior to the 01.01.2017 by which the amended Railway
Accidents and Untoward Incidents (Compensation) Rules, 1990 came into
force and maximum compensation on the date of award has been awarded in
favour of appellant, so no case for grant of interest is made out. Hence, appeal
be dismissed.
6. Resolving the controversy, this Court is referring the relevant paras
15.3 and 15.4 of the case of Union of India vs. Rina Devi, 2018 (3) ACCD
1339 (SC) as below:-
"15.3 ............We are of the view that law in the
present context should be taken to be that the liability will
accrue on the date of the accident and the amount
applicable as on that date will be the amount recoverable
but the claimant will get interest from the date of accident
till the payment at such rate as may be considered just and
fair from time to time. In this context, rate of interest
applicable in motor accident claim cases can be held to be
reasonable and fair. Once concept of interest has been
introduced, principles of Workmen's Compensation Act
can certainly be applied and judgment of 4-Judge Bench in
Pratap Narain Singh Deo (s up ra) will fully apply.
Wherever it is found that the revised amount of applicable
compensation as on the date of award of the Tribunal is
less than the prescribed amount of compensation as on
the date of accident with interest, higher of the two
amounts ought to be awarded on the principle of
beneficial legislation. Present legislation is certainly a piece
of beneficent legislation. [Prabhakaran Vijaya Kumar
(supra) Para 12].
15.4. Accordingly, we conclude that compensation
will be payable as applicable on the date of the accident
with interest as may be considered reasonable from time
to time on the same pattern as in accident claim cases. If
the amount so calculated is less than the amount
prescribed as on the date of the award of the Tribunal, the
claimant will be entitled to higher of the two amounts. This
o rd er will not affect the awards which have already
become final and where limitation for challenging such
awards has expired. This order will not by itself be a
ground for condonation of delay. Seeming conflict in
Rathi Menon (supra) and Kalandi Charan Sahoo (supra)
stands explained accordingly. T h e 4-Judge Bench
judgment in Pratap Narain Singh Deo (supra) holds the
field on the subject and squarely applies to the present
situation. Compensation as applicable on the date of the
accident has to be given with reasonable interest and to
give effect to the mandate of beneficial legislation, if
compensation as provided on the date of award of the
Tribunal is higher than unrevised amount with interest, the
higher of the two amounts has to be given."
7. Accordingly, matter is covered by the case of Union of India vs. Rina
Devi (supra) and appellant have been awarded accordingly, appeal has no merit,
hence, it is dismissed.
(GAJENDRA SINGH)
JUDGE
DPS
