UNION OF INDIA Vs. BRIGEET CHACKO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An Army personnel died in an accident white he was travelling in train from Howrah to Chennai. His legal representaitves applied for compensation. He was employed in the Army and posted at arunachal Pradesh. He was on his journey to house and he was a bona fide passenger. The Railway Tribunal awarded Rs. 4,00,000/- as compensation strictly in accordance with Part-I of Schedule to Railways accidents and Untoward Incidents Compensation (Amendment) Rules, 1997. Tribunal held as follows :

(2.) Question of law raised in this appeal is whethertribunal was fight in awarding 6% interest on the award amount from the date of registration of the case. It is submitted that the Bombay High Court in Sanjay sampatrao Gaikwad v. Union of India (AIR 2005 Bom 409) held that interest is payable only from the date of award. Compensation is payable for the injuries suffered in an accident. Hence payment of compensation relates to the date of accident. There is no dispute regarding the amount to be computed in railway accident claims as amount of compensation for death and other injuries is prescribed by the Schedule. Whatever be the income, age etc. , the same amount is payable if a person is injured in an untoward accident while travelling in train with ticket. So it cannot be stated that amount is determined only at the time of final adjudication of the award and interest can be directed to be paid only from the date of award and we are unable to accept the ratio of the decision of the Bombay High Court (supra).

(3.) There is no provision under the Railways Act br Rules regarding payment of interest. Under Section 4a of the Workmen's compensation Act, interest is payable from the date of accident as that is the date when the compensation becomes due as held in pratap Narain Singh Dev v. Sreenivas salathra (1976 (1) SCC 289) and Oriental insurance Company v. Khajuni Devi, ((2002) 10 SCC 567). In the Motor Vehicles Act also there is no specific provision regarding payment of interest on the compensation awarded. But in view of the various Apex court decisions, it is now settled that interest is payable from the date of application at such rate at the discretion of the Tribunals. While awarding interest, tribunal can consider the bank rate also. Here the interest was ordered only from the registration of the case that too only at the rate of 6% per annum. We are of the opinion that the railway Tribunal used the discretion correctly. In any event, we are of the opinion that the above direction need not be interfered in an appeal and no substantial injustice is caused as interest is payable for the delay in payment of compensation. Considering the increase in money value and facts and circumstances of the case, we see no ground to interfere in the order to pay interest on the amount of compensation at 6% per annum from the date of registration of the case. Hence appeal is dismissed. Appeal dismissed.