IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY C.M.A. No.4812 of 2004 Date:11.04.2011 Between: Manilal Jain .....Appellant AND The Union of India, rep. By its General Manager, SC Railway. ....RESPONDENT The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY C.M.A. No.4812 of 2004 JUDGMENT: 1. This is an appeal filed under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 directed against order dated 17.09.2004 delivered in O.A.A.No.274 of 2001 by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench at Secunderabad. 2 . The appellant is the petitioner and the respondent is the respondent in the application. The parties are referred to as arrayed in the petition in the Tribunal from now on words for convenience sake. 3. The applicant filed the application before the Tribunal under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act,1987 read with Section 124A and 125 of the Railways Act (for short, the Act) seeking compensation of Rs.2.00 lakhs with interest on account of injuries sustained by him when he fell down from Train No.6045, Navjeevan Express at Tenali Railway Station on 26.9.2001. 4. The respondent filed counter denying the entitlement of the compensation by the applicant in view of Section 123(c )(ii) or 124A of Railway Claims Act and sought for the dismissal of the application. 5. In order to establish the claim, the applicant got examined himself as A.W.1 and got marked Exs.A.1 to A.5 on his behalf. Nobody was examined and no documents were marked for the respondent. 6. Taking into consideration the evidence available on record, the Tribunal passed award directing the respondent to pay compensation of Rs.1,60,000/- to the applicant within two months from the date of award, failing which to carry interest @ 6% per annum from the date of order till the date of realisation of the amount. 7. Aggrieved by the award of the Tribunal, the present appeal is filed. 8. The learned counsel for the appellant has pleaded that the Tribunal should have granted interest @ 15% per annum on the compensation amount awarded by it from the date of order till the date of realisation. 9. By virtue of a decision rendered in Tahazathe Purayall Sarabi and othes vs. Union of India[1], interest @ 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of award and @ 9% p.a., from the date of award till the date of reasliation of the amount is permissible. Therefore, the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is not tenable wholly. However, so far as the interest part is concerned, it is to be modified in view of the decision referred supra. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed modifying the interest granted by the Tribunal holding that the applicant is entitled to interest @ 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of award and @ 9% p.a., from the date of award till the date of reasliation on the award amount of Rs.1,60,000/-. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________________ G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY,J. 11th April, 2011 GK. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY C.M.A. No.4812 of 2004 Date:11.04.2011 Gk. [1] 2009 2 ACJ 2444