K.S. Radhakrishnan, J. — Leave granted.

2. We are, in this appeal, concerned with the question whether the appellant is legally entitled to be intervened in a claim petition filed by the 3rd respondent herein under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (for short ‘Tribunal Act’).

3. The claim petition OA No. (1) 2 of 2010 was preferred by the 3rd

respondent against the Southern and Eastern Central Railways before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench claiming an amount of Rs.9,46,85,726/- together with the interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the date of payment and also for other consequential reliefs.

4. In the claim petition, the appellant herein filed IA. 3/2011 for intervention claiming to be an interested party stating that its.presence is necessary for a proper adjudication of the claim. LA4/2011 was also preferred by the 2nd respondent herein Central Railway to implead three other parties, namely Subham Sugar Agencies, Umesh Chaudhary, Ex. Goods Supervisor, Tatuha and Ambika Sugars Ltd., contending that the Railway Claims Tribunal (for short ‘Tribunal’) has no jurisdiction to proceed with the case since it i