JUDGMENT : Dinesh Chandra Somani, J The instant appeal has been preferred by the claimant-appellants under Section 23 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 against the judgment and award dated 15.5.2009 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as the 'learned Tribunal') in Claim Petition No.O.A.II/13/2005 titled as Shri Gyaneshwar & Anr. Vs. Union of India, whereby the claim petition of the claimant/appellants has been allowed partly and awarded Rs.4 lacs as compensation to them without any interest. 2. Skeletal material facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are that the claimant/appellants filed a claim petition before the Tribunal for compensation of Rs.15 lacs with interest on account of death of one Shri Nathu Singh stating therein that appellant No.1 is son and appellant No.2 is wife of Shri Nathu Singh. It is also averred that deceased died due to untoward incident, which took place on 6.1.2004, while he was travelling in Train No.170 UP with ticket No.03779353. The respondent/non-claimant filed reply to the claim petition and contested the case. 3. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the learned Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition and awarded Rs.4 lacs to the claimant/appellants with proportionate cost. The learned Tribunal while passing the impugned judgment and award also directed the respondent to pay the award amount within a period of 60 days, failing which the interest shall be payable @ 6% per annum from the date of judgment till the date of actual payment of the same. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that it is well settled principle of law that the learned Tribunal has right to award interest with compensation, but the learned Tribunal has discarded the interest wrongly and prayed to award interest @ 12% per annum on the awarded amount from the date of claim petition till realisation. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the appellants placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Thazhathe Purayil Sarabi & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Anr., 2009 7 SCC 372 . In para 26 to 30, 37 & 38 of the judgment, Hon'ble Apex Court has held that : "26. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the appellants placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Thazhathe Purayil Sarabi & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Anr., 2009 7 SCC 372 . In para 26 to 30, 37 & 38 of the judgment, Hon'ble Apex Court has held that : "26. The courts are consistent in their view that normally when a money decree is passed, it is most essential that interest be granted for the period during which the money was due, but could not be utilised by the person in whose favour an order of recovery of money was passed. 27. As has been frequently explained by this Court and various High Courts, interest is essentially a compensation payable on account of denial of the right to utilise the money due, which has been, in fact, utilised by the person withholding the same. Accordingly, payment of interest follows as a matter of course when a money decree is passed. 28. The only question to be decided is since when is such interest payable on such a decree. Though there are two divergent views, one indicating that interest is payable from the date when claim for the principal sum is made, namely, the date of institution of the proceedings in the recovery of the amount, the other view is that such interest is payable only when a determination is made and order is passed for recovery of the dues. However, the more consistent view has been the former and in rare cases interest has been awarded for periods even prior to the institution of proceedings for recovery of the dues, where the same is provided for by the terms of the agreement entered into between the parties or where the same is permissible by statute. 29. Accordingly, we are unable to sustain the order of the Railway Claims Tribunal directing payment of interest on default of the payment of the principal sum within a period of 45 days. 30. As we have indicated hereinbefore, when there is no specific provision for grant of interest on any amount due, the court and even tribunals have been held to be entitled to award interest in their discretion, under the provisions of Section 3 of the Interest Act and Section 34 of the Civil Procedure Code. 37. 30. As we have indicated hereinbefore, when there is no specific provision for grant of interest on any amount due, the court and even tribunals have been held to be entitled to award interest in their discretion, under the provisions of Section 3 of the Interest Act and Section 34 of the Civil Procedure Code. 37. Even if the appellants may not be entitled to claim interest from the date of the accident, we are of the view that the claim to interest on the awarded sum has to be allowed from the date of the application till the date of recovery, since the appellant cannot be faulted for the delay of approximately eight years in the making of the award by the Railway Claims Tribunal. Had the Tribunal not delayed the matter for so long, the appellants would have been entitled to the beneficial interest of the amount awarded from a much earlier date and we see no reason why they should be deprived of such benefit. 38. As we have indicated earlier, payment of interest is basically compensation for being denied the use of the money during the period in which the same could have been made available to the claimants. In our view, both the Tribunal, as also the High Court, were wrong in not granting any interest whatsoever to the appellants, except by way of a default clause, which is contrary to the established principles relating to payment of interest on money claims." 5. On consideration of submissions of learned counsel for the appellants and having regard to the material made available on record and more particularly looking to the reasons recorded by the learned Tribunal in support of the impugned judgment and award and the law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court, I am of the view that the appeal deserves acceptance and the interest @ 6% simple interest per annum is required to be granted to the claimant/appellants. 6. Consequently, the appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment and award dated 15.5.2009 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur passed in Claim Petition No.O.A.II/13/2005 is modified to the extent that the awarded sum shall carry interest @ 6% simple interest per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of actual payment of the same. No order as to costs.