JUDGMENT : I.A.No.5913 of 2016 The present Interlocutory Application has been filed for condoning the delay of 270 days in filing the appeal. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that in view of facts and circumstances mentioned in the petition, delay in filing the appeal may be condoned. Learned Counsel appearing for the Railways submits that appeal may be heard on merits and delay may be condoned. Sufficient cause has been shown in para 4 onwards of the petition to condone the delay in filing the instant appeal. Accordingly, delay in presenting this appeal is hereby condoned. I.A.No.5913 of 2016 stands disposed of. M.A.No. 94 of 2016 This Misc. Appeal has been preferred for quashing/setting aside the Judgment /Award dated 20.02.2015 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Ranchi Bench in Case No. OA(IIU)/RNC/2010/0019 whereby and whereunder the Railway Claims Tribunal has allowed the claim petition and hold that the applicant is entitled to get compensation amounting to Rs.4,00,000/- without interest and cost. 2. The case of the appellants lies in a narrow compass. The deceased Bhupendra Prasad Pandey holding a valid ticket was travelling by Mandar Hill Passenger from Mandar Hill to Bhagalpur on 05.06.2009 and accidentally fell down from the train near Bhagalpur at 19.00 hours on 05.06.2009. The leg of the deceased was crushed and later on he was declared dead in Railway Hospital, Bhagalpur. The ticket of the deceased was lost. The appellants claimed for compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- with interest from the date of filing of the claim petition. 3. The respondent –Railway in written reply has given a formal and evasive denial by putting the applicant to strict proof of all the allegations made in the application and craved leave to file additional reply if required and prayed to dismiss the claim petition. The DRM’s report based on the enquiry done under “The Railways Passengers (Manners of Investigation of Untoward Incidents) Rule, 2003” has been filed. 4. The learned Tribunal, after hearing the parties, framed following issues. i). Whether Bhupendra Prasad Pandey, Son of late Parwati Chandra Pandey was a bona fide passenger as alleged ? (ii). Whether any untoward incident as defined under Section 123 (c) (2) of the Railways Act, 1989 occurred to Bhupendra Prasad Pandey, S/o Late Parwati Chandra Pandey while travelling from Mandar Hill to Bhagalpur by Mandar Hill Passenger on 05.06.2009 ? (iii). Whether Bhupendra Prasad Pandey, Son of late Parwati Chandra Pandey was a bona fide passenger as alleged ? (ii). Whether any untoward incident as defined under Section 123 (c) (2) of the Railways Act, 1989 occurred to Bhupendra Prasad Pandey, S/o Late Parwati Chandra Pandey while travelling from Mandar Hill to Bhagalpur by Mandar Hill Passenger on 05.06.2009 ? (iii). Whether the applicants are entitled for the compensation as claimed and other relief, if any ? 5. After framing of the issues, the applicants/appellants furnished copies of documents and after examining records of the case, matter was heard at length and learned Tribunal discussed the issues in details and all the issues were decided in favour of the applicants/appellants. 6. Mr. Afaque Rashidi, learned Counsel appearing for the claimants, assailing the impugned judgment on the point of interest submits that claimants are entitled for interest also in view of the Judgment rendered in the case of “Union of India Vrs. Rina Devi”, reported in 2018 (2) JBCJ 478 SC. Learned Counsel further argues that this case is squarely covered by the said judgment and as such claimants are entitled for the amount of interest also. 7. On the other hand, Mr. Mahesh Tewari, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent-Railway vehemently opposes the prayer and submission of the claimants and submits that claimants are not entitled for interest. 8. Be that as it may, having heard both sides and on perusal of the records, I find force in the submission of learned Counsel for the appellant. The case of the appellant has not been considered in proper perspective even though it has been held that the deceased was a bona fide passenger and it was an untoward incident. The main grievance of the claimant is that he has not been granted interest against the amount of compensation and I am of the considered opinion that claimants are entitled for the interest also. 9. The issue fell for consideration before the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of “Union of India Vs. Rina Devi”, reported in 2018 (2) JBCJ 478 SC, and it has clearly been held in the said judgment that interest can be awarded from the date of accident and not from the date of application. Relevant para-18 of the said judgment is reproduced hereunder: “18. Rina Devi”, reported in 2018 (2) JBCJ 478 SC, and it has clearly been held in the said judgment that interest can be awarded from the date of accident and not from the date of application. Relevant para-18 of the said judgment is reproduced hereunder: “18. As already observed, though this Court in Thazhathe Purayil Sarabi (supra) held that rate of interest has to be at the rate of 6% from the date of application till the date of the award and 9% thereafter and 9% rate of interest was awarded from the date of application in Mohamadi (supra), rate of interest has to be reasonable rate at par with accident claim cases. We are of the view that in absence of any specific statutory provision, interest can be awarded from the date of accident itself when the liability of the Railways arises upto the date of payment, without any difference in the stages. Legal position in this regard is at par with the cases of accident claims under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Conflicting views stand resolved in this manner.” 10. I find that this case is squarely covered by the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “Rina Devi (Supra). Applying the aforesaid principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Court holds that claimants are also entitled for the simple interest @ 9% per annum from the date of accident. 11. As a sequel of aforesaid facts and circumstances, judicial pronouncements, this appeal is hereby allowed. Judgment /Award dated 20.02.2015 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Ranchi Bench in Case No. OA(IIU)/RNC/2010/0019 is hereby modified. The claimant is held entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of accident i.e. 05.06.2009 till the date of payment. 12. Needless to say that the entire amount of interest shall be paid to the claimant by the respondent-Railway within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order after furnishing the needful requirements regarding identity of the claimant.