Andhra Pradesh High Court | Interest on Railway Accident Compensation to Parents Payable from Date of Claim Application
Sanchayita Lahkar
The High Court of Andhra Pradesh Single Bench of Justice Sumathi Jagadam directed that interest on the compensation amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- awarded in a railway accident claim be calculated from the date of the application until realization. The Court modified the order of the Railway Claims Tribunal, which had earlier granted interest only from the date of its order. The Bench instructed the Respondent/Railway to pay the awarded sum with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the application, further directing the immediate release of the compensation to the appellants. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal was accordingly disposed of, with no order as to costs.
The matter originated from a tragic railway accident on 30 January 2006. The deceased, Kuruva Sekhar, was travelling in Train No. 248 from Kalluru to Anantapur with a valid Second-Class Ticket No. 87447. Due to heavy rush inside the compartment, he accidentally fell after crossing Garladenne Railway Station and sustained severe injuries, which proved fatal.
The applicants in the claim were the parents of the deceased, Kuruva Kullayappa and Smt. Kuruva Lakshmi Devi. They approached the Railway Claims Tribunal at Secunderabad, seeking compensation under Section 123(b)(i) of the Railways Act, which entitles parents to compensation where the deceased passenger was unmarried. The applicants submitted a certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Guntakal, Anantapur District, to substantiate that the deceased was unmarried at the time of death.
The claim was filed under the provisions of the Railway Claims Tribunals Act, 1987. The applicants sought Rs. 4,00,000/- as compensation for the accidental death of their son, who, according to them, was a bona fide passenger.
The Respondent/Railway filed a written statement denying the applicants’ entitlement to compensation under Sections 123(c) and 124A of the Railways Act, 1989. The railway contended that the death occurred due to the negligence of the deceased, alleging that he was sitting on the footboard of the train when he fell. They prayed for dismissal of the claim application.
During proceedings before the Tribunal, the first applicant, Kuruva Kullayappa, was examined as AW.1, and five documents (Exhibits A-1 to A-5) were marked in support of the claim. The Respondent/Railway, however, did not examine any witnesses or mark any documents.
On 06 April 2011, the Railway Claims Tribunal allowed the application, directing the Respondent/Railway to deposit Rs. 4,00,000/- within three months, along with interest at 9% per annum. However, it restricted the award of interest to run only from the date of the Tribunal’s order until realization, rather than from the date of the application. Aggrieved by this restriction, the applicants filed the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal before the High Court under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunals Act, 1987.
In hearing the appeal, Justice Sumathi Jagadam noted that the appellants’ counsel had limited the argument to the issue of awarding interest from the date of filing the application, rather than from the date of the Tribunal’s order. The Court recorded: “Now, the short question that arises for consideration is whether the appellants/applicants are entitled to interest from the date of filing of the Application or the date of the Order?”
The Court observed that the deceased, aged about 20 years, had died as a result of falling from a train due to heavy rush in the coach. The judgment stated: “Admittedly, the deceased, at the time of the accident was about 20 years old and, due to the heavy rush in the coach, he accidentally fell from the train and died of severe injuries.”
The appellants argued that they had not engaged counsel to file another application before the Tribunal and were, therefore, entitled to interest from the date of the original application. Justice Jagadam noted: “There is no oral or documentary evidence to show that the appellants/applicants had previously filed O.A.A. No. 155 of 2006. The Railway Claims Tribunal has erroneously concluded and awarded interest from the date of the order instead of the date of filing the application.”
The judgment further observed the deep emotional impact of the death of a child upon parents, recording: “The Tribunal ought to have considered that the children hold significant symbolic importance for parents in terms of their generativity and hope for the future. When a child dies, the dreams may die too. This death of the future seems integral to the intensity of many parents’ responses. While guilt and self-blame are common in bereavement, they are especially pronounced following the death of a child. Such a loss severely threatens the parents’ role as caregivers, protectors, and mentors.”
The Court also noted the absence of rebuttal from the Respondent/Railway. The judgment recorded: “The respondents/railways have not examined any witnesses or marked documents on their behalf. In the absence of any contra evidence, the Tribunal ought not to have held that the applicants are entitled to interest only from the date of the order.”
Having considered the submissions and the record, the Court modified the Tribunal’s order. Justice Sumathi Jagadam directed: “Hence, the order dated 06.04.2011 passed by the Tribunal in O.A.A. No. 275 of 2006 is modified by directing the Respondent/Railway to calculate interest from the date of the application until the amount is realised and to pay interest at 6% p.a. on the awarded amount of Rs. 4,00,000/-.”
The Court issued a further directive: “The Respondent/Railway is also directed to release the amount immediately to the appellants.” The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal was disposed of accordingly, with the Court making no order as to costs. The judgment concluded with: “As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.”
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Appellants: Ineni Venkata Prasad, Advocate
For the Respondents: Adhi Venkateswara Rao, Advocate; J.U.M.V. Prasad, Central Government Counsel
Case Title: Kuruva Kullayappa & Anr v. Union of India, Rep. by General Manager, South Central Railway
Neutral Citation: APHC010735952012
Case Number: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 849 of 2012
Bench: Justice Sumathi Jagadam
