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

2022 Supreme(Gau) 480

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
M/S Assam Roofing Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
The Union Of India And Anr. – Respondents
MFA 54, 62, 23, 56, 26, 135, 156, 46, 51, 29, 22, 41, 34, 140, 82, 81, 39, 38, 24, 15, 69, 44, 160, 65, 43, 60, 47, 36, 25, 28, 32, 79, 61, 30, 94, 176, 48, 58, 66, 21, 45, 33, 78, 42, 111, 70, 71, 52, 35, 20, 67, 64, 50, 16, 40, 18, 31, 53, 68, 37, 57, 73, 49, 103 of 2021
Decided on : 21-07-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants :Mr. K. P. Maheswari, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. B. Sarma, Mr. B. K. Das, Mr. G. Goswami, Mr. K.K. Parashar, SC

Point of Law : Concept of reasonableness dictates that courts even while taking liberal approach must weigh in rights and obligations of both parties thereby when a right has accrued in favour of one party due to gross negligence of other, courts taking concept of reasonableness should refrain from exercising discretionary relief of condoning delay.

Headnote:

Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 – Section 13, 13 (1) (a) (i), 17 (1), 17 (2) – Railways Act, 1989 – Section 78B, 64, 65, 106, 2 (j) – Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 – Motors Vehicle Act, 1988 –Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – Appeal - Seeking condonation of delay - Whether Railway Claims Tribunal was justified in dismissing claim applications being barred by limitation - Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 enables Court to admit an application or appeal if applicant or appellant, as case may be satisfies Court that he had sufficient cause for not making application and/or preferring appeal within time prescribed. (Para 20)

Findings of Court :

Court is of opinion that a period of 3 (three) months from last date of filing claim applications can be taken as a reasonable period within which appellants/applicants ought to have exercised due diligence by making enquiries with his/her/their counsel and found out as to whether applications were duly filed or not. This is more so when there are no materials brought on record to show that applicants/appellants were under impression that claim applications were filed on time after taking into consideration proviso to Section 17 (1) of Act of 1987. Any period beyond 3 (three) months from last date of filing, in opinion of this Court, cannot be constituted to be reasonable for condoning delay inasmuch as, in opinion of this Court, same would negate provisions of Section 17 (2) of Act of 1987 and tantamount to legislation by this Court.

Result : Ordered accordingly.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. K. P. Maheswari, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma; Mr. B. K. Das; Mr. G. Goswami and Mr. K. K. Parashar, learned Standing Counsels, Railway Administration.

2. All the appeals raise a common question as to whether the Railway Claims Tribunal was justified in dismissing the claim applications being barred by limitation. The instant appeals arise out of orders dated 30.12.2020, 24.02.2021, 04.03.2021, 16.03.2021, 23.03.2021, 24.02.2021, 08.03.2021 and 19.03.2021. As all the appeals raise the same question of law and predominantly on similar facts; this Court, by this common judgment proposes to dispose of all the appeals.

3. Before going into the merits of each of the appeal, this Court would like to take into account the Preamble, Objects and Reasons as well as the some provisions of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (for short, the Act of 1987).

4. The Preamble of the Act of 1987 reads as follows:-

An Act to provide for the establishment of a Railway Claims Tribunal for inquiring into and determining claims against a railway administration for loss, destruction, damage, deterioration or non-delivery of animals or goods entrusted to it to be carried by railway or for the refund of fares or freight or for compensation for death or injury to passengers occurring as a result of railway accidents [or untoward incidents] and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

5. The Statement of Objects behind the enactment of the Act of 1987 are as herein under:-

The substantive liability of the railway administration for loss, destruction, damage, non-delivery or deterioration of goods entrusted to them for carriage, and for death or injury, or loss etc., to a passenger in a railway accident involving a passenger train is laid down in the Indian Railways Act, 1890. The consignors/consignees and passengers or their representatives prefer claims for compensation against the railway administration. Those who claim compensation for loss of and damage to booked goods and are not satisfied with the decisions of the railway administration, file suits in the Courts of Law. Claims for compensation for death of, or injury, or loss, etc. to passengers in train accidents are at present settled by the Claims Commissioners.

As the litigation in the Courts of Law and before the Claims Commissioners is very protracted, it has been decided to set up a specialised Tribunal for speedy adjudication of such claims. The setting up of such a Claims Tribunal with Benches in different parts of the country, and with judicial and technical members, will provide much relief to the rail-users by way of expeditious payment of compensation to the victims of rail-accidents and to those whose goods are lost or damaged in rail transit. The Claims Tribunal will also expedite settlement of disputes regarding refund of fares and freight charges. It will reduce the burden on the various civil courts in the country, thereby giving them more time to decide other cases speedily. The Bill seeks to give effect to the above objectives.

6. From a perusal of the Preamble as well as the statement of objects and reasons quoted herein above, it would be seen that the said Act of 1987 was enacted to provide for establishment of the Railway Claims Tribunal for enquiring into and determining claims against the Railway Administration for loss, destruction, damage, deterioration or non-delivery of animals or goods entrusted to it to be carried by the railway or for the refund of fares or freights or for compensation for death or injury to passengers occurring as a result of railway accidents or untoward incidents and for matters connected thereto. The reason for establishment of the Railway Claims Tribunal was that the consignors/consignees and passengers or their representatives prefer claims for compensation

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top