IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST APRIL 2009 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1931 MFA.No. 68 of 2009() -------------------- O.A.No.OAU/ERS/2007/31 OF RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT(S): APPLICANTS ------------------------ 1. SAYYID MUHAMMED @ SAIBU KOYA, S/O. MULLAKOYA THANGAL, AGED 49 YEARS, SHABNAM HOUSE, PANCHAYATH BEACH ROAD, THIKKOT.P.O, KOZHIKODE DIST, PIN - 673 529. 2. JAMEELA, W/O. SAYYID MUHAMMED @ SAIBU KOYA, AGED 39 YEARS, SHABNAM HOUSE, PANCHAYATH-BEACH ROAD, THIKKOTI.P.O, KOZHIKODE DIST, PIN - 673 529. BY ADV. SRI.SAKIR.K.H. RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------- UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, M.M.C 5TH FLOOR, CHENNAI - 3. ADV. SRI.N.B.SUNIL NATH,SC, FOR RAILWAYS THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * M.F.A.No.68 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of April 2009 J U D G M E N T BASANT,J The appellants are claimants before the Railway Claims Tribunal. They claimed compensation under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act 1987. The respondent was directed to pay an amount of Rs.4,00,000/-. The accident occurred on 09/02/2007. The claim was staked by filing a petition before the tribunal on 22/08/2007. The order/award was passed on 17/10/2008. The tribunal did not direct payment of any interest from the date of the accident or the date of the petition or even the date of the impugned order/award. However, the tribunal directed that if the order is not complied with within a further period of 45 days, the appellant shall be entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date of default. 2. The short contention raised by the appellants is that in the light of the decisions in Nalini v. Union of India [2008 (3)KLT 17] and Union of India v. Brigeet Chacko [2007(3) KLT 603], the tribunal ought to have awarded, even in the absence of a specific provision in the statute, reasonable interest M..F.A.No.68/09 2 to compensate the appellants for the delay in payment. 3. We are in complete agreement with the learned counsel for the appellant. We are satisfied that in the interests of justice, interest must have been awarded from the date of the petition i.e.22/08/2007. Reasonable interest can be awarded in the light of the two decisions referred above. Interest has been awarded @ 6% per annum. The learned counsel for the appellants contends in the light of the precedents and the provision in other analogue statutes interest must have been awarded atleast @7.5% per annum. We agree with the learned counsel for the appellants. 4. This appeal is accordingly allowed in part. The impugned order is modified. It is directed that the compensation amount of Rs.4,00,000/- shall be paid along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from 22/08/2007 to the date of payment. Total costs of Rs.10,000/- shall also be paid to the appellants. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jsr M..F.A.No.68/09 3 M..F.A.No.68/09 4 R.BASANT &C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. .No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT 06/02/2009