JUDGMENT : Heard Mr. U. Chackborty, learned Senior counsel appearing for the N.F. Railway department. Also heard Ms. M. Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. This appeal has been filed by the Union of India under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act of 1987, challenging the judgment dated 14.08.2015 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench in Application No. M.A./48/2014. 3. The respondent filed an original application after a delay 10 days minimum to miximum 17 years for filing claim application. The learned tribunal after accepting the reasons for delay, condone the delay. 4. Thus the appellant felt aggrieved and file the present appeal. 5. The railway claims tribunal constituted under the Railway Claims Tribunal Act of 1987, draws its power under Section 17 of the said statute to condone the delay in filing applications. Section 17 reads as under:- Limitation.-(1) The Claims Tribunal shall not admit an application for any claim- (a) under sub-clause (i) of clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 13 unless the application is made within three years from the date on which the goods in question were entrusted to the railway administration for carriage by railway; (b) under sub-clause (ii) of clause (a) of sub-section (1) 4 [or, as the case may be, sub-section (1A)] of section 13 unless the application is made within one year of occurrence of the accident; (c) under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 13 unless the application is made within three years from the date on which the fare or freight is paid to the railway administration: Provided that no application for any claim referred to in sub-clause (i) of clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 13 shall be preferred to the Claims Tribunal until the expiration of three months next after the date on which the intimation of the claim has been preferred under section 78B of the Railways Act. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), an application may be entertained after the period specified in sub-section (1) if the applicant satisfies the Claims Tribunal that he had sufficient cause for not making the application within such period. 6. It is the settled position of law that while entertaining petitions praying for condonation of delay in filing an application seeking justice, courts/tribunals are not required to be hyper technical. 6. It is the settled position of law that while entertaining petitions praying for condonation of delay in filing an application seeking justice, courts/tribunals are not required to be hyper technical. It is true that law helps the vigilant only but one must keep in mind that the primary purpose of a court of law is to administer justice to the people. The railway claims tribunal is a dispute resolution forum and that is why the law makers have inserted Section 17 in to the Act of 1987, so that it can exercise the power to condone delay in filing applications. 7. The learned tribunal has elaborately written the judgment citing decisions of the Supreme Court. This court is of the opinion that the order passed by the tribunal does not suffer from perversity and this judgment does not require interference of this Court. 8. It may be mentioned that on multiple earlier occasions, this Court has taken a similar view in a similar situation. Therefore, under the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is again of the opinion that the present appeal is devoid of merit and stands dismissed accordingly.