THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.793 OF 2008 AND CROSS OBJECTIONS (SR) No.25972 OF 2010 COMMON JUDGMENT: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, under Section 23 of the Railways Act, 1989, (for short, “the Act”) is directed by the Railways against the order, dated 06.12.2007, in O.A.A.No.274 of 2002, on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, Secunderabad, whereunder and whereby, the application filed by claimants claiming compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- consequent on the death of the deceased, was allowed. 2. The claimants filed cross-objections aggrieved by the same order in not awarding interest from the date of application till the date of order. 3. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the present appeal may be stated as follows: On 06.08.2002, Tanniru Sreenu (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') was returning to Ongole after visiting his cousin Musalaiah at Secunderabad. The deceased purchased a general ticket for Charminar Super Fast Express and boarded the said train in general compartment. While travelling in the said train, the deceased accidentally fell down from the running train between Errupalem and Gangineni and died on the spot due to the injuries sustained by him. Thereafter, police conducted inquest on the dead body of the deceased. Hence, the claim petition. 4. The respondent - railways filed the written statement denying the averments made in the application and stated that during the enquiry of the Driver of 6094 Dn. Express, he revealed that one male person aged about 45 years was run over and killed at KM 553/26-28 on down line by his train and that it is not a case of accidental fall from the train and therefore, the railways are not liable to pay any compensation. Hence, the respondent – railways prays to dismiss the claim petition. 5. Basing on the above pleadings, the following issues have been framed by the Tribunal: “1. Whether the Applicants are the dependatns of the deceased Tanniru Sreenu? 2. Whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger of Charminar Express travelling from Secunderabad to Ongole? 3. Whether the deceased died as a result of an untoward incident of accidental fall from the train between Errupalem and Gangineni Railway Stations? 4. To what relief?” 6. During trial, AWs.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A1 to A7 were got marked, on behalf of the applicants. On behalf of the respondent, RWs.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.R1 to R3 were got marked. 7. After considering the evidence available on record, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the deceased had accidentally fallen from the moving train and sustained multiple injuries in an untoward incident and granted compensation of Rs.4,00,000/-. Challenging the same, the present appeal is filed by the Railways. For not granting interest from the date of petition till the date of Award, claimants filed cross- objections. 8. Now, the point for determination is whether the order of the Tribunal is correct, legal and proper? 9. The learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger travelling in the train; that due to his own negligence, he had fallen from the train; that the Tribunal committed an error in awarding the compensation and hence, he prays to set aside the impugned order. 10. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent contended that the Tribunal after considering the evidence on record rightly granted compensation and hence, he prays to dismiss the appeal and allow the cross-objections by granting interest. 11. It is not in dispute that the dead body of the deceased was found lying by the side of railway track at KM 553/26-28. Though it is disputed that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger travelling in the train, but when the police held inquest on the dead body of the deceased under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, a valid ticket was seized from the dead body of the deceased which suggests that the deceased was a bona fide passenger travelling in the said train. Though the railways are disputing about the ticket, none of the persons connected with issue of ticket was examined to show that the ticket was not a valid ticket to travel in the said train. The contention of the learned standing counsel for the appellant is that the Guard informed the concerned authorities that a person was standing on the track while the train was going; that he was hit by the train and he was not a bona fide passenger. But, to prove the same, no evidence was let in by the respondent - railways. On the other hand, the Driver found the dead body of the deceased on the side of the track. Therefore, the Tribunal upon proper appreciation of evidence on record rightly held that the deceased was a bona fide passenger travelling in the train and awarded compensation. Hence, there are no grounds to set aside the impugned order. 12. Insofar as the cross objections are concerned, in view of a decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in Tahazhatha Puratul Sarabi V. Union Of India[1], wherein it is held thus: “We, therefore, allow the appeal and modify the order of the High Court dated 24.5.2007 affirming the order of the trial court and direct that the awarded sum will carry interest at the rate of 6 per cent simple interest per annum from the date of the application till the date of the award and, thereafter, at the rate of 9 per cent per annum till the date of actual payment of the same.” the cross objectors/applicants are entitled for simple interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of application till the date of Award. 13. Accordingly, C.M.A.No.793 of 2008 is dismissed and Cross Objections (SR) No.25972 of 2010 is allowed granting simple interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of application till the date of Award to the cross objectors/applicants. There shall be order as to costs. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J September 21, 2010 MD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.793 OF 2008 AND CROSS OBJECTIONS (SR) No.25972 OF 2010 Between: The Union of India .....APPELLANT AND Tanniru Chenchaiah and others ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.793 OF 2008 AND CROSS OBJECTIONS (SR) No.25972 OF 2010 September 21, 2010 [1] AIR 2009 SC 3098