IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 5TH APRIL 2010 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1932 MFA.No. 243 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20/08/2009 IN (ILU/ERS/) IN OA.149/2009 of RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT(S): 2ND RESPONDENT ---------------------------- SUDHA, D/O. BABY, PULIPARAVILA VEEDU, KURISUMUTTOM, SANKAR NAGAR PERIKAVU.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.D.KISHORE RESPONDENT(S): APPLICANT & IST RESPONDENT ----------------------------------------- 1. M. VIJAYAKUMAR, S/O. MUTHUMADAN PILLAI, SARASWATHI VILASAM, MANNOORKAVU VILLAGE, KUTTICHAL, NEDUMANGADU TALUK, THIRUVNANTHAPURAM. 2. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, CHENNAI. ADV. SRI.V.K.BALACHANDRAN FOR R1 SRI.N.B.SUNIL NATH,SC, RAILWAYS FOR R2 THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/04/2010 ALONG WITH MFA NO. 244 OF 2009 MFA NO. 248 OF 2009, MFA NO. 31 OF 2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.F.A. Nos.243, 244, 248 of 2009 & 31 of 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 5th day of April, 2010 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. These appeals are directed against the common judgment in two original applications which were filed by the appellant and respondent under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act 1987 seeking compensation for the death of their son Sumesh Vijay. Parties are herein after referred to as they are arrayed in M.F.A.No.244/2009. 2. Appellant and respondent are respectively the mother and father of Sumesh Vijay referred to above. 3. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 4 lakhs to be divided among the appellant and the respondent in the ratio of 9:1. In other words, it was directed that a sum of Rs. 3,60,000/- be paid to Sudha, the appellant and Rs. 40,000/- be paid to Vijayakumar, the respondent. 4. When these appeals came up for consideration before us on March 24, 2010, it was suggested by us that the parties do try for an amicable settlement especially since they are now divorced and their MFA.Nos.243/99 & connected cases 2 relationship totally estranged. 5. When the parties appeared before us in the morning, we had interacted with them and persuaded them to try for a settlement. It is heartening to note that at the intervention of the learned counsel for the parties, all the disputes pending between them have been settled. 6. The appellant has agreed to pay an additional sum of Rs. 60,000/- over and above the sum of Rs. 40,000/- ordered to be paid to him by the Tribunal. In turn, the respondent has agreed to withdraw the suit filed by him against the appellant which is now stated to be pending on the file of the Munsiff Court, Nedumangad claiming proportionate share in the terminal benefits relating to their deceased son, who was serving in the Army. It is seen further agreed that the respondent would be entitled to ½ of any future benefits receivable from Union of India in connection with the death of Sumesh Vijay. Further, the respondent has agreed that he would not stake any claim in the terminal and other service benefits already received by the appellant in respect of late Sumesh Vijay. Similarly, the respondent will not have any claim with respect to family pension, arrears or family MFA.Nos.243/99 & connected cases 3 pension and other pensionary benefits, if any, payable to the appellant. 7. A compromise petition incorporating all the above terms of settlement has been filed in which the appellant, the respondent and their respective counsel have signed. The compromise petition is taken on record and it shall form part of this judgment. The Appeals are disposed of in terms of the compromise entered into between the parties. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. MFA.Nos.243/99 & connected cases 4