SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(AP) 718

L.NARASIMHA REDDY
Durgavathi Devi – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) IN these appeals, filed under Section 23 of the railway Claims Tribunal Act, the only grievance of the appellants is that the tribunal has not awarded any interest on the amount of compensation, in the respective claims.

( 2 ) IN the claims presented before it, the Railway Claims Tribunal awarded different amounts, in favour of the respective appellants, in accordance with the provisions of the Railways Act and the Rules made thereunder. It did not grant any interest pendente lite. However, it imposed the condition that, in case the amount awarded by it is not deposited within two months from the date of order, the compensation shall carry interest at 6% per annum, from the date of the order, till the date of realization. At the stage of admission itself, learned Counsel for the appellants had advanced extensive arguments.

( 3 ) SRI S. Chandrasekhar, learned counsel for the appellants submits that though there is no specific provision in the railways Act or Railway Claims Tribunals act, it is always in the discretion of the tribunal to grant interest. He submits that the claims were presented in the year 1999, and for variety of reasons they were not dis









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top