IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
FAO No. 4378 of 2008
Date of decision : July 28, 2009
Gurbachan Kaur and others
Appellants
Versus
Union of India
Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR
Present : Mr. Paul S. Saini, Advocate
for the appellant
Mr. Jagdish Marwaha, Advocate
for the respondent
NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (ORAL)
Learned counsel for the appellant at the outset restricted his
claim only to the grant of interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the
date of filing of the claim petition till the date of payment.
Mr. Jagdish Marwaha, Standing counsel for Railways does not
dispute the claim to the extent of paying interest on the awarded amount
from the date of the filing of the claim petition till its realization. However,
he expressed his strong reservation on the rate of interest, which should
be levied. A similar stand was taken by learned counsel for the appellant
before this Court in bunch of appeals decided vide order dated 17.7.2009
passed in FAO No. 110 of 2009 titled as Des Raj versus Union of India
and others.
While deciding the rate of interest, this Court had held as
follows in the above mentioned similar matters :-
“Taking into account the observations of the Apex Court made
in the cases of Uttaranchal Transport Corporation, Tamil
Nadu State Transport Corporation and the Managing
Director, TNSTC (supra), wherein the interest was fixed at the
rate of 7.5% per annum instead of 9% and also, at the same
time, without losing sight of the fact that in the case of
FAO No. 4378 of 2008 -2-N. Parameswaran Pillai and Rathi Menon (supra), relating to
claim under the Railways Act, 1989 and Railway Accidents
and Untoward Incidents (Compensation) Rules, 1990, entitling
the appellant interest at the rate of 12% per annum, as also
keeping in view the interest given by the Banks and other
financial institutions, interest at the rate of 9% per annum on
the compensation amount so awarded by the Tribunal from
the date of filing of the claim petition till its actual realization
would be just and fair.”
The present appeal is covered by the ratio of the judgment
passed in FAO No. 110 of 2009.
The present appeal is, accordingly, disposed of in the same
terms as FAO No. 110 of 2009 with direction to pay 9% interest on the
amount awarded by the tribunal from the date of filing of the appeal till its
actual realization.
However, it is clarified that the present appellant No. 1 is
allowed to withdraw the money so deposited in her name in pursuance to
the directions of the tribunal.
(Nirmaljit Kaur)
28.7.2009 Judge
reena