Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 319 (GAU)

Union of India (NF Railway) v. Kishore Barman

2017-03-14

KALYAN RAI SURANA

body2017
JUDGMENT AND ORDER : Heard Mr. U.K. Nair learned counsel for the petitioner assisted by Mr. M.P. Sharma. Also heard Mr. A. Gohain, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 1. By filing this appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 5.4.2006 passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Branch, Guwahati in claim petition No. 1-TR/2003. The short point of challenge in the present appeal is whether the learned Railway Claims Tribunal has the power of granting interest @ 6% per annum on the award of compensation amounting to Rs. 4,00,000/- @ 6% from 18.3.2003, i.e., due to filing of the claim petition till 60 days from the date of the order failing which the interest was to be paid @ 7.5% per annum from 18.3.2003. 2. The learned counsel for the respondent has taken up a preliminary plea that the question of power of the learned Railway Claims Tribunal to grant the interest is no longer valid in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Thazhathe Purayil Sarabi Vs. Union of India, 2009 (7) SCC 372 , wherein it has been held that the 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. By the said ratio, the Hon’ble Apex Court allowed the appeal and affirmed the order of the learned trial court that the awarded sum interest @ 6% simple interest per annum from the date of the award and thereafter @ 9% per annum till the date of actual payment of the same. He further relied on the case of Union of India Vs. Koina Keirugba Meetei, 2006 (2) GLT 200 wherein this Court had also held that the Railway Claims Tribunal had the power to grant interest on compensation, thereby upholding the order of the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, granting interest @ 6% per annum. 3. In the present case in hand except for the challenge to the interest, the appellant has not challenged the quantum of compensation. Therefore, by applying the ratio of the two herein before referred cases, this court is of the view of that order passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, in the present appeal is liable to be sustained. 3. In the present case in hand except for the challenge to the interest, the appellant has not challenged the quantum of compensation. Therefore, by applying the ratio of the two herein before referred cases, this court is of the view of that order passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, in the present appeal is liable to be sustained. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed by maintaining the order in so far as granting interest on the compensation amount is concerned. In view of the above, there is no requirement to re-appreciate the facts or any other issue involved in the case. 4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that principal amount of compensation already had been paid to the respondent and therefore, the appellant shall calculate the interest which is required to be paid to the respondent in terms of the award passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, and the same may be deposited before the said learned Tribunal within a period of 4 (four) weeks from today. 5. The appeal stands dismissed. 6. There shall be no order as to costs. 7. Let the LCR be returned back.