G NAZEER AHMAD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-appellant filed the present C.M.A. aggrieved by the order made by the Railway Claims Tribunal Secunderabad at Taranaka, Secunderbad made in I.A. No. 499 of 2002 in O.A.A. No. 304 of 1999, dated 14-11-2002.

(2.) It is stated that the appellant herein is the claimant in the above claim petition on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal. Secunderabad Bench and the appellant filed the claim petition claiming compensation against the respondents on account of his son's death in railway accident occurred on 26-11-1999 with Salda Express at Khanna Punjab, and the Railway Claims Tribunal allowed the claim in part and awarded Rs. 4,04,000/- by way of compensation. It was further stated that initially the appellant-petitioner was permitted to withdraw an amount of Rs. 29,000/- out of the compensation awarded and the rest of the amount be kept in fixed deposit for a period of three years. Thereafter, the appellant filed an application seeking permission to withdraw an amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- for purchasing a shop at Kurnool and for other expenditure. The aforesaid Tribunal had permitted to withdraw an amount of Rs. 1,73,000/- with a direction that the said amount should be given to the vendor of the shop through the Registrar at the time of registration of the property and that the appellant was also given liberty to file an application for further release. Accordingly, the appellant filed the present application with supporting evidence, seeking permission of the Tribunal to withdraw an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/-, and the said application was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed.

(3.) Sri A. Vishnu Vardhan Reddy, counsel representing the appellant had drawn my attention to Section 18(2) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (herein after referred to as 'Act' in short). The learned counsel also had drawn my attention to Section 23 of the Act dealing with appeals and had submitted that as a person aggrieved with the impugned order, the present C.M.A. is preferred. The learned counsel explained that the reasons given by the appellant-petitioner, seeking permission to withdraw the amount are bona fide reasons, and hence, the dismissal of the application by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench at Taranaka is totally unsustainable.