Kiran Devi And Ors vs Union Of India

Heard, learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondent/Railway.

Claimants are the appellants before this Court. They have preferred this appeal for enhancement of the award dated 28.02.2017 in Case No.

OA(IIU)/RNC/2016/0010 whereby the claimants have been awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.8,00,000/- payable within a period of 90 days from the date of judgment i.e. 28.02.2017.

Learned counsel for the appellants has assailed the impugned award only on the ground that the learned Tribunal has not granted any interest on the awarded amount from the date of accident or from the date of filing of the application rather only awarded interest @ 9% per annum after 90 days of the award, if the compensation is not paid to the claimants.

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that this Court while passing the order on 08.01.2020 in M.A. No.311 of 2018 has granted interest @

7.5% instead of 6% from the date of filing of the application till the date of actual payment, as such, same rate of interest may be given from the date of filing of the application.

Learned counsel for the respondent/Railway has opposed the prayer and has submitted that as per the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Rina Devi, reported in (2019) 3 SCC 572 paras 14 and 19 of which are profitably quoted hereunder:

“14. In exercise of power under Section 129 of the 1989 Act, the Central Government framed rules called the Railway Accidents and

Untoward Incidents (Compensation) Rules, 1990. The Rules provided for a schedule prescribing the amount of compensation payable in respect of death and injuries. The said Rules have been amended w.e.f. 1-1-2017 by Notification dated 22-12-2016 substituting the schedule

by higher amount of compensation.”

x x x

“19. Accordingly, we conclude that compensation will be payable as applicable on the date of the accident with interest as may be

considered reasonable from time to time on the same pattern as in accident claim cases. If the amount so calculated is less than the amount prescribed as on the date of the award of the Tribunal, the claimant will be entitled to higher of the two amounts. This order will not affect the awards which have already become final and where limitation for challenging such awards has expired, this order will not by itself be a ground for condonation of delay. Seeming conflict in Rathi Menon [Rathi Menon v. Union of India, (2001) 3 SCC 714, para 30: 2001 SCC

(Cri) 1311] and Kalandi Charan Sahoo [Kalandi Charan Sahoo v. South-East Central Railways, (2019) 12 SCC 387 : 2017 SCC OnLine

SC 1638] stands explained accordingly. The four-Judge Bench judgment in Pratap Narain Singh Deo [Pratap Narain Singh Deo v. Srinivas

Sabata, (1976) 1 SCC 289: 1976 SCC (L&S) 52] holds the field on the subject and squarely applies to the present situation. Compensation as applicable on the date of the accident has to be given with reasonable interest and to give effect to the mandate of beneficial legislation,

if compensation as provided on the date of award of the Tribunal is higher than unrevised amount with interest, the higher of the two

amounts has to be given.”

Learned counsel for the respondent/Railway has submitted that initially before 01.01.2017, the compensation was fixed as Rs.4,00,000/- which was enhanced after amendment as Rs.8,00,000/-. The Apex Court has taken such view in the case of Union of India Vs. Rina Devi (2019) 3 SCC 572 that either Rs.4,00,000/- with interest or a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- whichever is more shall be given to the claimants but both cannot be granted i.e.

Rs.8,00,000/-along with interest cannot be granted.

Learned counsel for the respondent/Railway has submitted that the appellant has filed this Miscellaneous Appeal contrary to the judgment passed by

the Hon'ble Apex Court.

Learned counsel for the respondent/Railway has further submitted that the Apex Court held that amount of compensation payable on the date of accident with reasonable rate of interest shall first be calculated. If the amount so calculated is less than the amount prescribed as on the date of the

award, the claimant would be entitled to higher of these two amounts as rendered in the case of Union of India v. Radha Yadav, (2019) 3 SCC 410 of which para 11 of which is profitably quoted hereunder:-

“11. The issue raised in the matter does not really require any elaboration as in our view, the judgment of this Court in Rina Devi [Union

of India v. Rina Devi, (2019) 3 SCC 572] is very clear. What this Court has laid down is that the amount of compensation payable on the date of accident with reasonable rate of interest shall first be calculated. If the amount so calculated is less than the amount prescribed as on the date of the award, the claimant would be entitled to higher of these two amounts. Therefore, if the liability had arisen before the amendment was brought in, the basic figure would be as per the Schedule as was in existence before the amendment and on such basic figure reasonable rate of interest would be calculated. If there be any difference between the amount so calculated and the amount prescribed in the Schedule as on the date of the award, the higher of two figures would be the measure of compensation. For instance, in case of a death in an accident which occurred before amendment, the basic figure would be Rs 4,00,000. If, after applying reasonable rate of interest, the final figure were to be less than Rs 8,00,000, which was brought in by way of amendment, the claimant would be entitled to

Rs 8,00,000. If, however, the amount of original compensation with rate of interest were to exceed the sum of Rs 8,00,000 the compensation would be in terms of figure in excess of Rs 8,00,000. The idea is to afford the benefit of the amendment, to the extent possible. Thus,

according to us, the matter is crystal clear. The issue does not need any further clarification or elaboration”

Learned counsel for the respondent/Railway has further submitted that the Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under misconception by the appellant and appellant does not deserve any enhancement of the interest on the award. Learned counsel for the respondent/Railway has further submitted that in the case passed by this Court i.e. M.A. No. 311 of 2018 on 08.01.2020, this Court has only enhanced interest from 6% to 7.5%. There was different question than what is the question in the present appeal. In the present appeal, the only question is whether a person who died before

01.01.2017 is entitled for claim of Rs.4,00,000/- with interest or Rs.8,00,000/- with interest or not? Considering the judgment passed by the Hon'ble

Apex Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Radha Yadav and Rina Devi (Supra) the position has been clarified by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that either the claimant can claim interest on Rs.4,00,000/- from the date of filing of the claim application or the date of accident but cannot claim interest on the enhanced amount by amendment with effect from 01.01.2017 to the tune of Rs.8,00,000/-, as such, the present appeal is fit to be dismissed.

Heard, learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials brought on record. Here it is a case where the deceased died on 21.02.2015 but the claim application was filed on 16.12.2015. At that time the compensation was Rs.4,00,000/- which was subsequently amended on 01.01.2017 to be

Rs.8,00,000/-. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid two judgments has held that the interest shall be given on Rs.4,00,000/- from the date of application or the date of accident or Rs.8,00,000/- after amendment on 01.01.2017 whichever shall be higher in the benefit of the claimants. Since amount of Rs.8,00,000/- has already been given to the claimants, claimants is not entitled for any interest in view of the judgment passed by the

Hon'ble Apex Court.

The learned Tribunal has further granted interest @ 9%, if the awarded amount is not satisfied to the claimants within a period of 90 days. This Court is not interfering with the same, as the same is not assailed before this Court in the appeal by the Railways. As such, the impugned award of

Rs.8,00,000/-shall be payable to the claimants within 90 days in terms of the order passed by the learned Tribunal. If not paid within 90 days then claimants are entitled for interest @ 9% on awarded amount.

At this juncture, learned counsel for the claimant has submitted that the award has been satisfied but it has been satisfied after four months without

9% interest. If it is so the claimants are entitled for interest as the same is not satisfied within 90 days, however, if the amount has been satisfied within 90 days, this Court is not expressing any opinion.

Accordingly, the instant Miscellaneous Appeal stands dismissed.