RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Case No: MA/NGP/63/2024 ________________________________________________________________

Date O R D E R ________________________________________________________________

12.03.2025. None for the Applicants.

Respondent by Adv. N. Lati who filed Reply on additional affidavit filed by the Applicants. Taken on record.

1. This application is for condonation of delay in filing the claim application after 1787 days. The reasons mentioned in the condonation delay application by the applicants are that after the death of deceased the mother of the applicant no.1 suffered from cancer and the applicant no.1 being a labour somehow maintained his mother & his family by doing labour work hence he could not get time to file the petition. His mother later died on 08.05.2022 but during the said period there was complete lockdown due to Pandemic situation due to this also he could not file the petition within time. Further, applicant no.1 being a labour had no occasion to deal with offices for procuring Police documents, Post mortem report, death certificate etc. and it has taken a lot of time of the applicant to obtain the said documents. Also, the applicants had tough time finding some work to maintain his family and in between his mother also died on 08.05.2022 thus the social pressures and traditions kept him house bound. Later, the applicant no.1 fell ill due to jaundice and taken treatment from Ayurvedic medicine which was also a big setback for the applicant due to which the entire procedure of filing the claim application was pushed back by several months. Finally, the applicants received guidance from his friends and filed the claim application on 28.08.2024. In support of his claim the applicants have also filed an additional affidavit wherein it is stated that the delay in filing the application was not intentional but due to illiteracy and financial crisis.

2. The respondent filed reply and argued that the applicants are vaguely relegating without any documentary evidence. No documentary evidence has been provided by the applicants to substantiate their claim and no genuine explanation has been provided in the present application for the huge delay of 1787 days (which is wrongly calculated in the petition and is more than 1787 days). The respondent have vehemently opposed and mentioned that the Ignorance of law is not an excuse and merely pleading without any documentary evidence will not serve any purpose for the applicants. Further, Respondent also argued that the delay mentioned in said application has occurred before and after the pandemic period and the applicants had the knowledge about filing the claim application but despite this the claim application was not filed within limitation. It is specifically submitted that in the application and additional affidavit the applicants had not mentioned the date of getting the necessary documents and no documentary evidence, as such, is filed on record. Respondent request to dismiss the application for condonation of delay.

3. It is seen from the records that the incident took place on 19.07.2016 and the case was filed on 28.08.2024 and the case was ought to have been filed on or before 19.07.2017. Although it is a beneficial legislation, there has to be a genuine reason for delay in filing the case and that should be within reasonable limit also. Parties should not take undue advantage in the garb of ignorance, illiteracy and poor financial or mental status concealing their own mistakes for the delay.

4. Respondent counsel mentioned that applicants have approached this forum in a casual manner, giving some lame excuse for delayed filing of case. This may not be fair chance to the respondent to contest as the relevant records may not be available with them for such a long period. Due considerations have been given for the reasons of ignorance, illiteracy etc. but there is no justifiable reason for the delay for the period from 2017 to 2024.

5. Peru