1 100 fa.1665.10 ndm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1665 OF 2010 Smt. Reeta Vilas Parulekar ... Appellant Versus The Union of India. ... Respondent ----- Mr. G.J.Mohan Rao for the Appellant. Mr. T.J.Pandian for the Respondent. ----- CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 02 nd August, 2011. P.C. 1 Taken up for final disposal at admission state. 2 The Appellant claimed compensation by invoking Section 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”). By the impugned judgment and order, the claim petition has been dismissed. 3 The case of the Appellant was that her deceased-son 2 100 fa.1665.10 died due to an untoward incident within the meaning of Section 123 (2) (c) of the said Act. The finding of the Tribunal is that the Appellant has failed to enter into witness box to prove her relationship with the deceased. 4 The submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the Appellant is that an opportunity be granted to the Appellant to adduce evidence by passing an order of remand. The said prayer is opposed by the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent by contending that in the event of application being allowed after remand, the Respondent will be unnecessarily burdened with interest. 5 I have carefully considered the submissions. The Appellant claimed that her son has died due to an untoward incident. The claim application has been dismissed mainly on the ground that the Appellant has not stepped into witness box. 3 100 fa.1665.10 Therefore, an opportunity deserves to be granted to the Appellant to adduce evidence. As far as interest is concerned, the Respondent can always raise appropriate contention before the Tribunal. 6 Hence, I pass the following order: i. The impugned judgment and order dated 26 th July, 2010 is quashed and set aside and Case No. O.A. 2003 / 702 is restored to the file of the Tribunal; ii. The Tribunal will allow the Appellant to adduce oral and documentary evidence ; iii. Even the Respondent is entitled to adduce evidence by way of rebuttal ; iv. It will be open for the Respondent to contend that hearing of the claim application has been delayed on account of default of the Appellant and therefore, the Respondent is not liable to pay any interest ; and 4 100 fa.1665.10 v. The appeal is partly allowed on above terms with no order as to costs. [ A.S.OKA, J ]