THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 298 OF 2014 Dated:23-07-2014
Between:
Smt. Sandhya and two others ... PETITIONERS AND Union of India, rep., by its General Manager, South East Central Railway, Bilaspur .. RESPONDENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 298 OF 2014
ORDER:
The petitioners filed an original application before the Secunderabad Bench of the Railway Claims Tribunal (for short ‘the Tribunal’), claiming compensation on account of the death of late Ranjan Kukhapadhya who is said to have died in a railway untoward incident. There was a delay of 835 days in filing the application. Therefore, they filed M.A No. 52 of 2009 under Section 17 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987. It was pleaded that on account of the death of the head of the family in the railway accident, the whole family was subjected to shock.
The 1st petitioner is said to be not only an illiterate but also physically handicapped and her two sons being respondent Nos.2 and 3 are economically weak and not conversant with the prescribed procedure under law. The application was opposed by the respondent. The Tribunal dismissed the application through order dated 11-10-2010. Hence, the revision.
Heard Sri Mukunda Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri B.H.R. Chowdary, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.
The delay is no doubt enormous and more than two years. The fact, however, remains that the petitioners are from remote area in Adilabad District and are said to be illiterates. Added to that, the 1st petitioner is a physically handicapped woman. The Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 has brought about a social security measure for payment of compensation to the persons who die or suffer injuries in a railway untoward incident. This Court is of the view that the delay can be condoned by putting certain conditions.
Hence, the C.R.P is allowed and the delay is condoned on condition that in the event of any amount being awarded as compensation, the petitioners shall not be entitled to be granted interest for the period of delay.
The miscellaneous petitions filed in this revision shall also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J 23rd July, 2014 ks