IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
Sanjeeb K. Panigrahi, J.
Saroj Ku. Sethy - Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
FAO No. 315 of 2019
Decided On : 13-08-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claim for compensation due to injury aboard a train. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. court's rationale for condoning delay in filing. (Para 6) |
| 3. final order to dispose of the fao. (Para 7 , 8) |
ORDER :
Sanjeeb K. Panigrahi, J.
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. The present Appeal has been filed by the Appellant with the following prayer:
“It is therefore prayed that let this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit this appeal, call for LCR issue notice to the Respondent after hearing the parties the order dated 11.01.2019 passed in M.A. No.56 of 2018 by the learned Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar Bench, Bhubaneswar be set-aside and further be pleased to remand the case for re-adjudicate by the learned Railway Claims’ Tribunal, Bhubaneswar Bench, Bhubaneswar for the interest of justice;
And pass any other order/orders as would deem fit and proper in this Hon’ble Court.”
4. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant had filed an application before the Railway Claim’s Tribunal, Bhubaneswar Bench, Bhubaneswar claiming compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- with 6% interest per annum from the date of incident on account of the injury sustained by him being fell down from the running train while he boarded in Paradip-Cuttack C.P. No.2 passenger Train on 19.10.2013 at Banabihari Galipur.
5. Learned counsel for the Appellant further submits that the Appellant had filed a petition under Section 17 of the Railway Claim’s Tribunal Act, 1987 for condonation of delay on the ground that the Appellant was severely injured and lost his leg and remained in bed for a long time and his elder brother was given the charge for filing his case, but, he could not do in time. Due to sever injury suffered by the Appellant, he could not contact his Advocate and procure the police paper to file the appeal. However, the Tribunal rejected the said petition for condonaton of delay.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that since this case relates to Railway compensation and the Appellant was suffering because of the severe injured, the delay in filing the claim application should have been condoned. Accordingly, the order dated 11.01.2019 passed by the Railway Claim’s Tribunal, Bhubaneswar Bench, Bhubaneswar in MA No.56 of 2018 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Railway Claim’s Tribunal, Bhubaneswar Bench, Bhubaneswar to pass a reasoned order afresh within one month from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order.
7. Accordingly, this FAO is disposed of.
8. Interim order, if any, passed earlier stands vacated.
The court held that a valid reason existed for the delay in filing the compensation claim due to the appellant's severe injuries, warranting the condonation of delay under the Railway Claims Tribunal....
Liberal condonation of delay should be permitted in cases of railway accidents, and efforts should be made to decide claims on merit without being concerned about technicalities of law.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the principles of condonation of delay under Section 17(2) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, and the need for a liberal,....
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....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.