HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No. 1182 OF 2008 DATED 28TH NOVEMBER, 2011. BETWEEN Chitturi Satyanarayana …….Appellant and The Union of India, rep. by its GeneralManager, South Central Railway, Secunderabad …… Respondent HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No. 1182 OF 2008 JUDGMENT: This appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act is ﬁled aggrieved by the order passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, Secunderabad, dated 16.02.2006 whereby I.A.No. 421 of 2004 in OAA.SR.No. 1870 of 2004 ﬁled by the appellant to condone the delay of 1370 days in ﬁling the claim application was dismissed. Heard. Perused the case file. It is the case of the appellant that while the appellant was travelling in a train from Vijayawada to Palkole on 16.2.2000, he fell down from the train, as a result of which, he sustained injuries. Though the application claiming compensation has to be ﬁled within one year, the appellant however ﬁled the same with delay of nearly four years. The Tribunal dismissed the said application holding that the appellant had not shown any suﬃcient ground to condone the delay. Hence, the appeal. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant contended that Tribunal ought to have condoned the delay in ﬁling the claim application in as much as the matter pertains to payment of compensation on account of the injuries sustained by the appellant in an untoward railway incident and as the right of the injured person to receive the compensation needs to be protected. He further submitted that the appellant is a poor and semi- literate and as such he could not ﬁle the claim application within the requisite time. I see no force in the contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant. It is true that the Railway Claims Tribunal Act is a beneﬁcial legislation intended to provide monetary solace to dependants of the victims or injured in the untoward railway incidents. It is also true that such claim petitions for payment of compensation should not be thrown out with hectic orders and the Tribunals/Courts should always make an endeavour to extend the beneﬁt to the claimants to a just and reasonable extent. However, a perusal of the order under appeal discloses that the claim petition for payment of compensation was ﬁled nearly four years after the alleged incident. The appellant pleaded that he is a poor and semi literate and due to his ignorance and illiteracy he could not ﬁle the claim application within time. The said explanation does not constitute a suﬃcient ground as envisaged under Section 17(2) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act. The Tribunal has dealt with the application of the appellant in detail and observed that the delay could not be condoned in a stereotype manner in every case while keeping in view the fact that the Railway Claims Tribunal Act is no doubt a social welfare legislation and application ﬁled seeking condonation of delay should not be dismissed on technical grounds. No other grounds are raised before this Court to take a diﬀerent view than what has been arrived at by the Tribunal and I therefore see no reason in the appeal which is liable to be dismissed. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is therefore dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. --------------------------------------------- JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA Dated 28th November, 2011. Msnro