Allowed

D.Krishna v. Union of India

Telangana HC12 Sept 2014CRP/4757/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court allowed a batch of civil revision petitions challenging conditions imposed by the Secunderabad Railway claims Tribunal. The conditions required advocates to pay Rs. 10,000 and threatened claimants with Bar Council complaints or suits. The Court set aside the conditions, restored the claim petitions, and ordered a refund of paid amounts.

What did the court decide?

Conditions imposed by the Tribunal requiring counsel to pay Rs. 10,000 and intimidating claimants are set aside. Claim petitions dismissed for default are restored without conditions. Paid amounts are

D.Krishna Vs Union of India — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.4079, 4186, 4247, 4315, 4351, 4382, 4388, 4406, 4592, 4702, 4757, 4827 & 4935 of 2013 AND C.R.P.No.3278 of 2014

¶2

COMMON ORDER:

¶3

In this batch of revisions, the petitioners felt aggrieved by the conditions imposed by the Railway claims Tribunal (for short, ‘the Tribunal’), Secunderabad, while restoring the claim petitions.

¶4

The petitioners approached the Tribunal for compensation either on account of death of their kin or the injuries suffered by them in untoward incidents, as the case may be. It appears that the advocates and the claimants were not happy with the approach and attitude of the members comprising of the Bench in the year 2012 and boycott call was given on 19^th and 20^th of December 2012. The Bench dismissed all the cases that were listed on those two days. Naturally, the applications were filed by the claimants for restoration of the same by stating some reasons. The Tribunal allowed the applications by imposing condition that the concerned advocate shall pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- in each case to the respondent i.e., the Railways and the claimants shall be at liberty to approach the State Bar Council, if the cost imposed on the advocate is not paid or to file suits for claiming damages suffered by them. Similar orders are challenged in this batch of revisions.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondent.

¶6

This Court, in fact, was shocked to know the manner in which the Tribunal was functioning at the relevant point of time. Almost a negative attitude and approach was adopted little realizing the fact that the very constitution of the Tribunal is for the benefit of the victims or

¶7

their dependants. A social security measure was reduced to the one of confrontation between the Bench and the Bar. The Secunderabad Bench has the reputation of being dispassionate and objective in payment of the claims and salutary. The attitude and the approach of the then members should not be permitted to trample the rights of the dependants of the deceased in the accidents.

¶8

In compliance with the directions issued by this Court, the Registrar of the Tribunal has palced before this Court a list of cases that have been dismissed for default and directed to be restored, with similar conditions. They are 61 in number and in nine cases, the amount of Rs.10,000/- was paid and in other matters, either revisions are filed or matters are left like that. This Court does not at all appreciate the procedure adopted by

¶9

the Tribunal. An adjudicatory agency constituted exclusively for determination of the claims of the victims or their dependants is not expected to have such negative or confrontationist attitude. Further, branding the advocate community as irresponsible and trying to corner them not only by directing them to pay costs from their pockets, but also inciting the claimants to file complaints in the Bar Council or file suits for damages can not at all be approved. But for the fact that the members, who passed such orders, are said to be not on the Bench, this Court would have considered the feasibility of passing strictures against them.

¶10

Hence, the Civil Revision Petitions are allowed and the conditions imposed by the Tribunal requiring the counsel for the petitioners to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as costs and the observation as regards the submission of complaints or suits against the counsel are

¶11

set aside. The claim petitions that were dismissed for default on 19^th and 20^th of December, 2012 shall stand restored, without any conditions. In such of the cases where the amount of costs have already been paid, the same shall be refunded by the recipients thereof, within a period of four weeks from today. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶12

The miscellaneous petitions filed in the Civil Revision Petitions shall stand disposed of.

¶13

___________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 12.09.2014 KH

D.Krishna v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.Krishna v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.Dr.Rana Praveen Vs Gulzarilal Kedia

Begumpet Village Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Vs The Dy Registrar/Divisional Cooperative Officer/Arbitrator

Smt.Ayesha Bee Vs Mohd.Kudrat All died per L.Rs

Sri Mahalakshmi Mines and Minerals, Vs Dr.Anup K.Pujari

Fatima Begum Vs Fatima Begum Zohra

P.Siddaiah, Vs Sri. A.K. Khan