IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO.968 OF 2011 Date:16.09.2011 Between : Sahik Peeran and 3 others. ... Appellants/Applicants A N D The Union of India, rep.by General Manager, South Central Railway, Secunderabad and another …Respondents/Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO.968 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, is directed against the order, dated 24.10.2008, in O.A.A.No.186 of 2003, on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, Secunderabad, in not awarding interest from the date of application till the date of realization on the compensation amount of Rs.4.00 lakhs awarded by the Tribunal. 2. The factual matrix is not in dispute. The injuries sustained by the applicant are also not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the injured was travelling in a passenger train as a bona fide passenger with valid ticket. The quantum Award of Rs.4,00,000/- is also not in dispute. The only contention of the learned counsel for the appellant/applicant is that the Tribunal has not granted interest from the date of application till the date of award. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent/Railways opposed the same on the ground that for about 390 days, the applicants have not evinced any interest to file the appeal to grant interest and for the lapses on their part, the railways administration cannot be made liable to pay the interest. 4. No doubt, granting of interest during the pendency of the application is a discretionary remedy to be exercised by the Court. That discretion has to be exercised judiciously. The application was filed in the year 2003 whereas the application was disposed of on 24.10.2008. It is not the case of the applicant that he was always reporting ready in the original application while it was pending before the Tribunal and that there are no lapses on their part for the delay in not disposing of the case for five years. It is also not the case of the applicants that because of the lapses on the part of the respondent/railway administration, the Original Application was pending in the Tribunal for five years. Immediately, after disposal of the application, the applicants have not filed the appeal. There was a delay of 390 days in filing the appeal and the same was condoned. Therefore, for the lapses committed on the part of the applicants, they cannot derive any advantage. There are no grounds to interfere with the impugned order and the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 5. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J Date:16.9.2011. Gk. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU C.M.A.No.968 of 2011. Date:16.09.2011 Gk