Mukundakam Sharma JUDGMENT
Altamas Kabir, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. On 13th November, 1998, one Kunhi Moosa, the husband of the Appellant No. 1, Thazhathe Purayil Sarabi, boarded the Madras Mail from Payyannur Railway Station to go to Madras. He had occupied berth No. 67 in Coach No. S-5, while his brother-in-law and two others who were travelling with him occupied berth Nos. 66 and 26 in the same coach. When the train was about to move from Parappanangadi Railway Station, the said Kunhi Moosa was robbed of the money that he was carrying with him and during the scuffle he was thrown out of the train by his assailants as a result of which he expired. The police registered Crime No. 46/98 in respect of the said incident and the case was taken to the to the Court of Sessions, Kozhikode.
3. In 1999, the appellants filed O.A. No. 68 of 1999 before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam, for compensation amounting to Rs. 4 lakhs. On 18th August, 2006, the accused persons were convicted under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC', for short) and sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 15,000/- each, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one year.
4. The Railway Claims Tribunal by its order dated 26th March, 2007, allowed the application in part and in terms of Section 123(c) of the Railways Act, 1989, directed the Union of India and its authorities to pay to the appellants herein compensation of Rs. 4 lakhs, out of which a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs was given to the Appellant No. 1, a sum Rs. 1,50,000/- was allotted to the Appellant No. 2 and Rs. 50,000/- was allotted to the Appellant No. 3. The Railway Claims Tribunal granted 45 days' time to the respondents herein to comply with the order for payment of the compensation amount, failing which it was directed that the appellants would be entitled to 6.5% interest per annum on the award amount from the date of default.
5. The said Award of the Railway Claims Tribunal was challenged before the Kerala High Court at Ernakulam by the appellants herein on the ground that in view of the decision of this Court in Rathi Menon v. Union of India MANU/SC/0165/2001 : [2001]2SCR365 , the claim for compensation would arise from the date of the incident. Such a view was expressed by this Court on account of the fact that the Railways Act, 1989 did not fix the amount of compensation, but left it to be determined by the Central Government from time to time. Reliance was also placed on another decision of this Court in N. Parameswaran Pillai and Anr. v. Union of India and Anr. MANU/SC/0326/2002 : AIR2002SC1834 , whereby 12% interest was granted from the date of application till the date of judgment following the decision in Rathi Menon's case (supra).
6. The Division Bench of the Kerala High Court took the view that even though the interest for the prior period had not been awarded, the Tribunal had awarded interest in case of default in compliance with the order for deposit of the compensation amount. The High Court was of the view that since the Tribunal had applied its mind while making the or........