Back
High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
U. L. BHAT, M. V. TAMASKAR
UNION OF INDIA - Appellant
Versus
LAXMIPATI - Respondents
M. P. 276 Of 1987
Decided On : 08/26/1994
RAILWAYS ACT - COMPENSATION - INTEREST - CLAIMS COMMISSIONER - POWER TO AWARD INTEREST - INDIAN RAILWAYS ACT, 1890 - SEC. 82 (A) - C. P. C. - SEC. 34 - INTEREST ACT, 1978 - SEC. 3.
Fact of the Case:
A railway accident occurred on 15-9-1984, resulting in the death of the husband of the first respondent. The first respondent filed an application under Section 82 (A) of the Indian Railways Act, 1890 before the Claims Commissioner, who awarded compensation of Rs. 1 lac with interest at the rate of 6% from the date of application till payment. The Union of India challenged the direction for payment of interest.
Finding of the Court:
The Claims Commissioner had the power to award interest on the basis of the principles of Section 34, C. P. C. The claimant should not be deprived of the benefit of interest during the pendency of proceedings merely because the proceedings lingered on for more than a year.
Issues: Whether the Claims Commissioner had the power to award interest on the compensation amount.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Indian Railways Act, 1890 did not contain any express provision enabling the Claims Commissioner to award interest. 2. However, the Courts were awarding interest on the compensation amount as a matter of course, on the principles of Section 34, C. P. C. 3. The Interest Act, 1978 provides for the award of interest on debts or damages, including interest for the period prior to the proceedings if a written notice had been given to the person liable to pay the damages indicating that interest will be claimed. 4. Section 34, C. P. C. deals with interest for the post-litigation period and empowers the Court to award interest on the principal sum adjudged from the date of the suit to the date of the decree. 5. Though Section 34, C. P. C. was not expressly made applicable to the proceedings before the Claims Commissioner, there was no reason to hold that the principles of Section 34, C. P. C. would be inapplicable.
Final Decision: The petition filed by the Union of India challenging the direction for payment of interest was dismissed.
( 1 ) FIRST respondent's husband, late S. C. Pati, was travelling in Train No. 143 U. P. Kalinga Express on 15-9-1984. Between Zalwara and Katni Railway Stations, the train met with an accident as a result of which S. C. Pati sustained injuries and died. First respondent, for herself and on behalf of her two minor children, filed an application under Section 82 (A) of the Indian Railways Act, 1890 before the Claims Commissioner appointed under Section 82 (B) of the Act (District Judge of the District ). The Claims Commissioner, by Annexure-P-2 order upheld the claim and awarded Rs. 1 lac as compensation and directed the railways to pay the amount with interest at the rate of 6% from the date of application till payment. The direction for payment of interest is challenged by the Union of India in this petition.
( 2 ) THE first respondent is absent. We have heard the learned Additional Central Government Standing Counsel. We have also heard Shri Abhay Sapre, Advocate who has been requested to assist the Court and place on record our appreciation of the assistance so rendered.
( 3 ) INDIAN Railways Act, 1890 did not originally contain any provision for payment of compensation or adjudication of claims by Claims Commissioner. Sections 82 (A) to 82 (J) were incorporated in the Act by Amendment Act No. III of 1943. These sections provided a scheme for assessment and payment of compensation to victims of railway accidents or their legal representatives. The maximum limit of compensation which could be awarded was fixed at Rs. 50,000/ -. Section 82 (B) empowered the Central Government to appoint Claims Commissioners. Section 82 (C) dealt with application for compensation. Section 82 (D) prescribed the procedure and powers of Claim Commissioners. The Claims Commissioner is required to follow such Summary Procedure as he thinks fit. He shall have all the powers of a Civil Court for the purpose of taking evidence on oath, enforcing attendance of witnesses and compelling discovery and production of documents. The Claims Commissioner shall be deemed to be a Civil Court for all the purposes of Section 194 and Chapter XXXV, C. P. C. Section 82 (E) enabled the Claims Commissioner to pass interim orders. Section 82 (F) enabled the Claims Commissioner to decide any question as to the liability of the railway administration to pay compensation or as to the quantum thereof or as to the person entitled to compensation. There was also a provision for appeal to the High Court. The Central Government framed Railway Accident (Compensation) Rules, 1950 under Section 82 (J) of the Act. Rule provide for applications, examination of applicant, summary dismissal of application, notice to opposite party, appearance and examination of opposite party, framing of issues, determination of issues, method of recording evidence, local inspection, summary examination, maintenance of diary, etc. Rule 27 stated that if any matter is not covered by Rules or covered insufficiently by the rules, the Commissioner shall follow the procedure laid down in the Code of Civil Procedure. Section 82 (A) of the Act of 1890 was amended by Amendment Act No. 44 of 1983 enhancing the limit of compensation to Rs. 1 lac.
( 4 ) THE 1890 Act was replaced by Indian Railways Act, 1989. The Act does not contain any provisions regarding compensation. The Act does not incorporate the provisions noticed above since in 1987 the Railway Claims Tribunal Act was enacted. The said Act was enacted to provide for establishment of Claims Tribunals for enquiring into and determining claims against railway administration for compensation for death or injury no passengers occurring as a result of railway accidents, for loss, destruction, damage, etc. of animals or goods entrusted with it and for, other reasons. Section 13 of the Act deals with jurisdiction, powers and authority of Claims Tribunal. The Tribunal is to exercise jurisdiction, powers and authority which before the appointed
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
