Dismissed

Union of India v. Gujarat Electricity Board

Gujarat HC13 Aug 2018FA/3269/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this first appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, the High Court addressed the liability to pay interest arising from the Tribunal's delay in signing a reviewed order. The court held that the appellant must pay the enhanced interest rate of 9% from the date the order was passed and signed, not from the date it was physically executed by the judge.

What did the court decide?

Directed the appellant to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 13/12/2016 until the date of realization.

Union of India Vs Gujarat Electricity Board — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Gujarat HC (2018)

¶1

C/FA/3269/2018 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3269 of 2018

¶4

==========================================================

¶5

UNION OF INDIA

¶6

Versus

¶7

GUJARAT ELECTRICITY BOARD

¶8

==========================================================

¶9

Appearance:

¶10

MS ARCHANA U AMIN(2462) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 MR DIPAK R DAVE(1232) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1

¶11

==========================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA

¶13

Date : 13/08/2018 ORAL ORDER

¶14

This First Appeal under Section-23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 [for short The Act 1987 ] is at the instance of the original respondent and is directed against the order dated 16/02/2016 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal and signed on 13/12/2016 in the Review 2016/009 in OC-9800/236.

¶15

It appears from the materials on record that the claim petition filed by the respondent herein under Section-16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 [for short the Act, 1987] against the appellant herein came to be allowed by the Tribunal vide judgment and order dated 12/06/2015. The operative part of the order reads as under:-

¶16

ORDER

¶17

The claim application is hereby allowed. The respondent Western railway is hereby directed to pay Rs.9,73,503/- as compensation to the present claimants with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim application till the date of this award within 60 days from the date of this order. On failing to do so the applicants will be

¶18

Page 1 of 5

¶19

C/FA/3269/2018 ORDER

¶20

entitled to get the interest @9% from the date of default. The respondents are also directed to pay the application fee Rs.6382/- to the claimants. The decreetal amount may be deposited in the bank account of the applicants through ECS once the applicants give complete bank details to the office of the Respondents.

¶21

No order as to costs.

¶22

Pronounced in the open court on this 12^th day of June, 2015.

¶23

Later, the appellant herein preferred a review application before the Tribunal. The review application came to be partly allowed in the following terms.

¶24

This Review Application has been filed by the applicant (original Respondent) seeking review/recall of the decree/order passed by this Hon'ble Tribunal in Division Bench in case No.OC 9800236 on 12.05.2015. However, this Review Application was filed after a delay of 133 days for which the respondent had filed delay condonation application, which was granted and Review Application has been registered.

¶25

The applicant in this Review Application prayed to recall/ review the decree passed by this Hon'ble Tribunal in Division Bench. The case in question was for the non-delivery of 10 wagons of the applicant for which the respondent had issued non delivery certificate and accordingly, the tribunal passed decree in this case on merit. However, in this Review Application, the applicant (original respondent) mentioned that the affidavit of the applicant viz.Sh. Arvind Rana, Dy. Superintendent, (Accounts), GSEC was not considered at the time of drafting judgment, wherein the applicant accepted that they had been delivered 04 wagons out of total 10 wagons in question of non-delivery for which the applicant had filed a claim compensation and Hon'ble Tribunal had passed decree on 12.06.2015 wherein, through an oversight, the fact of receipt of six wagons out of total non-delivered 10 wagons was not mentioned and therefore, the full decree was passed. It is also pertinent to note here that the said Applicant's Evidence was not cross-examined at the relevant time so as to highlight the same before the Hon'ble Tribunal.

¶26

It is appropriate to mention here that allowing this Review Application does not change the merit of the case as previously it was for nondelivery of 10 wagons and now, after reviewing the same, since applicant received 06 wagons out of 10 wagons, only 04 wagons were not delivered and thus, there is non-delivery of only 04 wagons and

¶27

Page 2 of 5

¶28

C/FA/3269/2018 ORDER

¶29

not 10 wagons as claimed in the original application No.OC 9800236. The claim compensation calculated by the applicant comes to the tune of Rs.5,25,874/- for non-delivery of rest 04 wagons as clarified above.

¶30

Therefore, the following order is passed:

¶31

ORDER

¶32

The review application is allowed. It is directed that the order in case No. OC 9800236 may be read as under:-

¶33

“ORDER

¶34

The Claim Application is partially allowed. The respondent Western Railway is hereby directed to pay Rs.5,25,874/- as compensation to the present claimants with interest @6% per annum from the date of filing the claim application till the date of this award within 60 days from the date of this order. On failing to do so the applicants will be entitled to get the interest @9% from the date of default. The respondents are also directed to pay the application fees Rs.6382/- to the claimants. The decretal amount may be deposited in the bank account of the applicants through ECS once the applicants give complete bank details to the office of the Respondents.

¶35

No order as to costs.”

¶36

The remaining order stands good as per judgment in OC 9800236 dated 12.06.2015. This order is also a part of the judgment dated 12.06.2015 and a copy of the order is also attached with the judgment and accordingly, the Review Application is disposed of.

¶37

Let the case file be consigned to the record room.

¶38

4. On 13/12/2016 the Tribunal passed the following order:-

¶39

In this case, the review was allowed on 16.02.2016 by the Division Bench consisting of myself and Hon'ble Member (T) Shri N M Misra and reserved for detailed order. However, Member (Technical) could not sign the detailed order which he had dictated before his retirement. But the same was kept lying in the custody of his PS, Shri V.C. Vyas due to his carelessness. During the fact finding enquiry he explained the reason. After the enquiry the case has been brought on board today.

¶40

On behalf of Mr. M.J. Patel, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent Mr. V.G. Goswamy appears today.

¶41

Hence, while exercising power under Rule 8 Order XX of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, I sign the order today.

¶42

Page 3 of 5

¶43

C/FA/3269/2018 ORDER

¶44

This is also the part of the order.

¶45

Thereafter, a clarification application came to be filed by the appellant with regard to the payment of interest. The said application MA 2015/69/01 came to be disposed of in the following terms.

¶46

The case is listed for hearing.

¶47

The applicant (original respondent) through this Misc. Application seeks clarification whether 6% interest to be applicable from the date of present order (order in review application) dated 13.12.2016 and 9% will be after completion of 60 days till default.

¶48

Original application was heard by Division Bench and order was passed on 12.06.2015 which was reviewed by Single Bench and order in the review application was passed on 13.12.2016 by single member bench.

¶49

Both the parties have no objection for hearing this application by single member bench.

¶50

A number of adjournments have been granted in this case on account of non-attendance of PO and Ld. Counsel for the applicant (original respondent).

¶51

I have gone through the original order and the order in the review application.

¶52

The order in the review application clearly mentions that the order in case No.OC 9800236 may be read as under:-

¶53

“Order – The Claim Application is partially allowed. The respondent Western Railway is hereby directed to pay Rs.5,25,874/- as compensation to the present claimants with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing the claim application till the date of this award within 60 days from the date of this order. On failing to do so the applicants will be entitled to get the interest @ 9% from the date of default. The respondents are also directed to pay the application fees Rs.6382/- to the claimants. The decretal amount may be deposited in the bank account of the applicants through ECS once the applicants give complete bank details to the office of the Respondents.

¶54

No order as to costs.”

¶55

It is clear that the payment was to be arranged within 60 days from

¶56

Page 4 of 5

¶57

C/FA/3269/2018 ORDER

¶58

the date of original award dated 12.06.2015 and the interest @ 6% was to be paid from the date of institution of the claim application till 12.06.2015 and in case of non-payment within 60 days the rate of interest is 9% from 12.08.2015 till the date of final payment.

¶59

With above clarification, the present MA is disposed of. The file may be consigned to the records room.

¶60

Ms. Amin submitted that the appellant should not be fastened with the liability to pay the interest for the period between 16/02/2016 and 13/12/2016. For the delay on the part of the Tribunal in signing the order passed on the review application, the Railways need not be asked to pay interest for that particular period. She would submit that the review application was filed in the main order. In such circumstances, the review application or the review proceedings could be said to be in continuation of the original proceedings. Therefore, the liability of paying interest should start from 13/12/2016.

¶61

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and having considered the materials on record, I am of the view that the appellant shall pay interest at the rate of 9% from 13/12/2016 till the date of realization.

¶62

With the above, this First Appeal is disposed of.

¶63

(J.B.PARDIWALA, J)

¶64

aruna

¶65

Page 5 of 5

Union of India v. Gujarat Electricity Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union of India v. Gujarat Electricity Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dipakkumar Omprakash Gupta Vs the State of Gujarat

Rajnibhai Khodabhai Patel Vs State of Gujarat

Yunush @ Bholo Sorabkhan Amjikhan Pathan Vs State of Gujarat

Shitalben Wd/O Pankajgiri Bhavangiri Vs State of Gujarat

Hiteshgiri Bhagvangiri Vs State of Gujarat

Maheshgiri Bhabhutgiri Vs State of Gujarat