Orissa High Court
Smt. Pratima Chetri And Others vs Union Of India Represented ... on 18 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
FAO No.627 of 2016
Smt. Pratima Chetri and Others .... Appellants
Mr. D. Mund, Advocate
-versus-
Union of India represented through its
General Manager, South Eastern .... Respondents
Railway, Kolkata
Mr. D.R. Bhokta, C.G.C.
CORAM:
SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
18.11.2022
Order No.
03. 1. The matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Heard Mr. D. Mund, learned counsel for the claimant -
Appellants and Mr. D.R. Bhokta, learned Central Government
Counsel for Respondent - Union of India.
3. Present appeal by the claimants is directed against the
impugned judgment dated 23rd September, 2016 of learned Railway
Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar Bench passed in OA(IIU)/BBS/
2011/0075, wherein compensation to the tune of Rs.4,00,000/- along
with interest @ 6% per annum from 14th August, 2014, instead of the
date of accident, has been granted.
4. Mr. Mund contends that the tribunal has erroneously directed
payment of interest from 14th August, 2014, i.e. the date when South
Eastern Railway has been impleaded by way of amendment.
5. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Rina
Devi, (2019) 3 SCC 572 has observed as follows:-
"19. 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 order 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 v. Union of India, (2001)
3SCC 714 and Kalandi Charan Sahoo v. South-East
Central Railways, (2019) 12 SCC 387 stands explained
accordingly. The four-Judge Bench judgment in Pratap
Narain Singh Deo v. Srinivas Sabata, (1976) 1 SCC
289 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 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."
6. In the instant case, it is seen that initially the claim application
was filed impleading Eastern Railway as a party, but subsequently it
was amended as South Eastern Railway. When the law is settled that
the claimant is entitled for interest from the date of accident, this
technical reason as assigned by the tribunal to refuse grant of
compensation from the date of accident, is found untenable.
Accordingly, the direction of the tribunal to that effect is set aside and
interest on the compensation amount is granted from the date of
accident.
7. Accordingly, the Respondent - Union of India is directed to
calculate interest on the compensation amount from the date of
accident and pay the balance amount within a period of three months
from today.
8. With the aforesaid observation and direction the appeal is
disposed of.
9. An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
M.K.Panda
