1 FA 284.26 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR FIRST APPEAL NO.284 OF 2026 1. Inderbai w/o Laxman Waghmare, Age 39 years, Occ : Household. 2. Poonam d/o Laxman Waghmare, Age 21 years, Occ : Education. 3. Shriniwas s/o Laxman Waghmare, Age 18 years, Occ : Education. 4. Radha d/o Laxman Waghmare, Age 16 years, Occ : Education (Minor) Applicant No.4 is minor and u/g of her real mother i.e. Applicant No.1. 5. Govind s/o Nagu Waghmare, Age 72 years, Occ : Nil. 6. Pochabai w/o Govind Waghmare Age 69 years, Occ : Household. All R/o. Wadar Galli, Chikhalwadi, Nanded-431 601 (M.S.) .. Appellants .. Versus .. Union of India, Through General Manager, South Central Railway. Secunderabad (A.P.) .. Respondent ………. Mr. D.S. Lambat, Advocate for Appellanta, Ms. N.G. Chaubey, Advocate for Respondents. ……….. 2026:BHC-NAG:13265 2 FA 284.26 CORAM : PRAVIN S. PATIL, J. DATED : 30.09.2026. JUDGMENT 1. By the present appeal, the appellants, who are the original claimants before the Railway Tribunal, approached before this court to challenge the impugned judgment and order dated 19.12.2025 passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur in Case No.MA/NGP/67/2025, whereby the application for condonation of delay is rejected. 2. The appellants came with a submission before this court that they are unfortunate legal heirs of deceased Laxman, who expired in an untoward incident dated 21.07.2019, while he was on his journey from Hujursaheb Nanded to Nizamabad by Mumbai Secunderabad Devgiri Express Train No.17057 with valid journey ticket. 3. It is the submission of the present appellants that after the accident of deceased Laxman, there was no one in their family to look after them, so also they were not educated persons. As such, they were not aware that in an accidental death, they are entitled for the compensation. As such, they 3 FA 284.26 have not immediately moved the application before the Railway Tribunal. 4. It is then submitted by the applicants/appellants that in the month of March-2020, the pandemic of Covid took place and same was in effect till 2022. During this period, by the orders of the State Government as well as Central Government movement of the citizens throughout India were restricted. Therefore, for this period of three years, they could not took any steps to file the application before the Tribunal. 5. It is also submitted by the applicants that due to untimely death of earning member of the family left behind two daughters and one son, who were minor at the relevant time, facing very hard days and finding difficult of their survival. In this peculiar circumstances, they were first given priority to find out the source of their livelihood and particularly the appellant no.1 was searched of labour work for the survival of the family as all the responsibility come on her shoulder to look after the family members. 4 FA 284.26 6. It is submitted that looking their financial condition, one of the known person has informed them that in view of death of the deceased in a railway accident, their family are entitled for compensation from the railway administration. Therefore, first they took efforts to collect the police papers by approaching the Police Station. It is their submission that they are the resident of one small village at Chikhalwadi Nanded and the police papers were at Police Station, Umari. Therefore, they could not collect the case papers immediately. 7. It is stated that after the collection of the case papers they have contacted the counsel at Nanded. He has instructed them for filing the claim application, the bank particulars and the details of the accident are required. In view of this, initially they have opened their bank accounts in the year 2023. After that they have moved the application before the Railway Tribunal. In such circumstances, it is their submission that the delay of six years and two months was caused in filing the application. 8. The said application was opposed by the Railway Administration before the Claim Tribunal. The Railway 5 FA 284.26 Administration, in addition to their denial to the averment made by the applicants in their application, they have also stated that the relevant record of the accident which was taken place on 21.07.2019 may not be available and if such record is not found available, then they will cause undue hardship in the matter. It is further stated by them that in such case the delay of 1210 days is condoned and in case the Railway Tribunal allowed the application filed by the claimants, they will have to bear unnecessary burden of paying the interest of 1210 days. In the light of this objection, they opposed the application for condonation of delay. 9. The learned Tribunal in its impugned order in respect of counting of delay has rightly considered the fact that the period of pandemic of Covid 19 from 15.3.2020 to 28.2.2022 as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India is required to be reduced from the entire delay caused in filing the appeal. The learned Tribunal, however, held even if such period is reduced, still there is a delay of three years and seven months which is not properly explained by the applicants in filing the application, therefore, by relying the judgment of this court, has 6 FA 284.26 rejected the application. 10. In the present case, it would be necessary to consider the fact that the provisions of the Railway Act particularly Section 124-A of the Act is a piece of beneficial legislation. The legislature has incorporated the said provision with a view that in case in an untoward incident, any passenger travelling from the railway, met with an accident, his family members should get the just and fair compensation. Therefore, keeping in mind the intention of the legislature, in such matters, the application for condonation of delay are required to be considered. 11. It is also well settled position of law that instead of length of delay, the reason for the delay is more important. However, considering this settled principles of law the delay which is stated in the present application is required to be considered in the present matter. 12. In the present case, considering the reply of the respondent before the Railway Tribunal that they will caused undue hardship if the record is not made available or the concerned official would have been transferred and not 7 FA 284.26 available, then it will be difficult for them to prosecute their cause before the Tribunal and secondly the Railway Tribunal has to bear the interest of 1210 days, this court, by order dated 14.08.2026, asked the respondent counsel to take specific instructions, whether the record of year 2019 when the accident was caused is available with the Railway Administration or not. The counsel appearing for the respondent fairly stated that the record is available. 13. It is pertinent to note that under the provisions of law, the Railway Administration having a statutory duty to prepare a DRM report in an accident which was occurred in the railway premises. The said report is then required to be produced before the Railway Tribunal and on that basis they can contest the proceeding before the Railway Tribunal. Here, considering the statement of the respondent counsel that record is available with the respondent Railway Administration, it is clear that the proceeding can be decided on its own merit by the Railway Tribunal. 14. In respect of apprehension that Railway Administration will have to pay the interest for the period of 1210 days can be 8 FA 284.26 taken care of by this court. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in a compensation cases has held that while dealing with the application for condonation of delay, this court can maintain the equity by directing that in case the claimants became entitled for the compensation, in that case, for the period of delay, they will not claim any interest from the employer or the authority. In view of this, the specific instructions were taken by the applicants and made a statement before this court that the claimants will not claim any interest for a period of delay of 1210 days caused in filing the application before the Railway Tribunal. 15. In the light of this factual as well as legal position & taking into consideration the provisions of the Railway Act, particularly Section 124-A of the Act, which is for the benefits of the claimants to claim compensation and the apprehension which is pointed out by the respondent can be satisfied as stated above, in my considered opinion, the delay of 1210 days caused in filing the application before the Tribunal can be condoned in the facts and circumstances of the present case. Accordingly, the following order is passed : 9 FA 284.26 O R D E R (i) The impugned judgment and order dated 19.12.2025 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur in Case No.MA/NGP/67/2025 is hereby quashed and set aside. (ii) The delay of 1210 days caused in filing the claim application is hereby condoned. The Railway Tribunal is directed to register the claim application and decide the same by following due procedure of law on its own merit. (iii) In case the claim application is allowed by the Railway Tribunal, the claimants shall not be entitled for interest for a period of 1210 days caused in filing the claim application. (iv) In above terms, the appeal is disposed of. (Pravin S. Patil, J.) Gulande Signed by: A.S. GULANDE Designation: Senior Pvt. Secretary Date: 06/10/2026 15:26:49