JUDGMENT :

Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying to set aside the order passed in M.A.No.4 of 2020 in O.A. (II-U) MAS No.12 of 2010 dated 15.03.2021 on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench.

1. This Revision is directed against an order of the Railway Claims Tribunal made in Miscellaneous Application No.4 of 2020 in OA No.12 of 2010, dated 15.03.2021.

2. The Original Application in OA No.12 of 2010 was filed by the petitioner seeking compensation for the injuries suffered by him in an accident that occurred at Jolarpet Railway Station, while he was a bona fide passenger travelling from Trichur to Jolarpet. The Railway Authorities denied the accident and claimed that the petitioner was not a bona fide passenger. The Railway Claims Tribunal by its award dated 13.07.2010 accepted the defence of the Railway Authority and dismissed the claim.

3. Aggrieved the petitioner preferred CMA No.2916 of 2011, before this Court. This Court by judgment dated 20.12.2019 reversed the findings of the Railway Claims Tribunal regarding the liability of the Railway Authorities and held that the petitioner is entitled to compensation. The Railway Claims Tribunal was directed to fix the compensation. Thereupon the petitioner filed a Memo before the Railway Claims Tribunal along with copy of the order of this Court made in CMA No.2916 of 2011.

4. Pursuant to the same, the Railway Claims Tribunal fixed the compensation at Rs.2,50,000/- for the injuries suffered by the petitioner. A sum of Rs.2,40,000/- was granted for the injury namely amputation of right foot which is covered by item No.24 of Part III of the compensation schedule and a sum of Rs.10,000/- was granted for other unscheduled injuries.

5. The Tribunal, however, concluded that the petitioner is not entitled to interest in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Rina Devi, reported in (2019) 3 SCC 572. The Tribunal also directed that a sum of Rs.25,000/- to be paid through transfer to the SB Account of the petitioner and the remaining Rs.2,25,000/- to be kept in fixed deposit for a period of two years in the name of the petitioner and directed the same to be transferred to the SB Account of the petitioner upon maturity.

6. Mr.S.Parathasarathy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is aggrieved by the non grant of interest and the direction for keeping the compensation in fixed deposit.

7. Mr.M.Vijayanand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Railways would submit that in view of the amendment to the Rules introduced in the year 2016 with effect from 01.01.2017, the Tribunal is authorised to direct the compensation to be held in fixed deposit having regard to the illiteracy of the claimant. Rule 5 of the Railway Accidents and Untoward Incidents (Compensation) Rules, 1990, reads as follows:

5. Mode of Payment:

5.1. The Tribunal may, in order to protect the sum awarded to the claimant, having due regard to the illiteracy or other disabling factors impairing the judicious use of such sum, issue directions for disbursing the award in terms of annuities, fixed deposits or other suitable mode as shall sub serve justice.

5.2. If any of the claimants is a minor or person of unsound mind, the Tribunal may give liberty to the guardian ad litem to use the interest accruals on the deposit that shall be made during the minority for maintenance.

5.3. Nothing in this rule shall limit the power of the Tribunal to make modifications of the mode of disbursal for reasons to be stated in writing depending on the exigencies requiring liquidation of any corpus created for annity or premature closure of fixed deposit, for the benefit of the claimant.

5.4. The orders dated 21st April 2017, 24th May, 2019 and 6th November, 2019 of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in FAO No.22/2015 and CM Application No.4501/2015 in Geeta Devi v. Union of India, relating to disbursement of compensation shall be read as part of this r