Allahabad High Court
GYANTI DEVI AND 2 OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
The High Court modified the award, directing the release of 50% of the compensation immediately, deeming it just and proper.
Summary
The petitioners challenged the Railway Accident Claims Tribunal’s order that only ₹80,000 of the ₹8,00,000 compensation awarded for the death of petitioner No.1’s husband be released immediately, with the balance placed in a fixed deposit for three years. They argued that the partial release was inequitable and that they should receive at least 50% of the award without further delay. The Railway argued that retaining ninety percent was in the petitioners’ interest because it would accrue interest over time. The High Court held that while part‑payment is a recognised principle, it must be applied flexibly based on the facts, and the petitioners’ circumstances warranted a larger immediate release. Consequently, the Court modified the award, directing the release of 50% of the compensation (₹4,00,000) within four weeks, with the balance to be invested in a high‑yield term deposit for three years. The writ petition was thereafter disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the partial release of compensation amounting to ₹80,000 is adequate under the circumstances of the case.
- Whether the High Court can modify the Railway Accident Claims Tribunal’s order to release a larger portion of the awarded compensation immediately.
Subjects
- railway accident
- compensation
- Railway Accident Claims Tribunal
- partial release
- fixed deposit
- writ petition
- discretion
- award modification
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 10176 of 2026
Gyanti Devi And 2 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Union Of India And Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashok Kumar Singh, Gaurav Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., Vivek Tripathi
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
2. The solitary grievance of the petitioners is that only ₹ 80,000/- of the amount
has been directed to be released in favour of the claimants/petitioners by
the impugned award of the Railway Accident Claims Tribunal dated
15.12.2025 is inequitable, unjust and grossly inadequate. It defeats the
purpose of award of compensation for death caused to husband of
petitioner no.1 in a railway accident.
3. A perusal of the record reveals that in a railway accident occurred on 29.1.2023,
Ram Awadh Prasad, husband of petitioner No.1 suffered fatal injuries and died on the
spot. Arising therefrom, petitioners instituted a claim petition on 20.9.2023 which has
been decided on 15.12.2025, almost three years after the occurrence of the accident.
Even then, by that award, the Tribunal has awarded ₹ 8,00,000/- to the claimants
(₹ 4,00,000/- to petitioner No.1, ₹ 2,00,000/- (each) to petitioner Nos.2 & 3,
sons of the deceased).
4. The Tribunal has provided for release of ₹ 80,000/- to the petitioners and the
balance is to be deposited in Fixed Deposit for a period of three years.
5. Petitioners are aggrieved by the wholly inadequate amount directed to be released,
in a mechanical manner. Looking at the total compensation awarded, a sum of ₹
80,000/-would be released at present though the petitioners claim that
compensation of ₹ 8,00,000/- has been awarded. At present, the
petitioners pray for release of at least 50% of the awarded amount to the
petitioners.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Railways would submit that the order
restraining release of ninety per cent of the award is only in the interest of the
petitioners as they are likely to receive a higher amount after three years upon accrual
WRIC No. 10176 of 2026
2
of interest.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, while
there can be no dispute to the principle universally applied in such cases where part
compensation amount is released at the time of the award being made and the balance
amount is invested for the benefit of the claimant, at the same time, it cannot be
applied as a rule of thumb in all cases. In that, individual facts and circumstances must
dictate the exercise of discretion, in such matters. The claimant/petitioner No.1 who
lost her husband, on who certain dependency may also be claimed cannot be forced to
litigate for years to earn an award of compensation and then be made to wait for
further years to receive that compensation owing to exercise of discretion by the
Court, ostensibly in the interest of such claimant.
8. Therefore, the above principle invoked by the learned Tribunal must be blended
with practicality so as to release a reasonable amount, keeping in mind the overall
circumstances of the case.
9. In the present case, petitioner No.1 is wife and petitioners no.2 & 3 are sons of the
deceased have waited for almost three years from the occurrence of death for award of
the compensation. The compensation awarded at the moment is also not excessive but
a modest sum of ₹ 8,00,000/-.
10. Accordingly, the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners for release of
at least 50% of the awarded amount to the petitioners is found to be wholly just and
proper. Accordingly, the award dated 15.12.2025 shall stand modified.
11. Let 50% of the awarded amount i.e. ₹ 4,00,000/- (₹ 2,00,000 to petitioner
No.1 and ₹ 1,00,000 (each) to petitioners No.2 & 3) along with proportionate
interest be released in favour of the petitioners within a period of four weeks from the
date of production of certified copy of this order. The balance amount shall be
invested and retained in highest bearing term deposit in a nationalized bank for a
period of three years.
12. With the above observations, the present writ petition is disposed of.
13. It is made clear that any amount paid in compliance of the award may be adjusted
against the amount to be released in pursuance of this order.
14. Also, this order has been passed independent of the right of the petitioner to claim
enhancement, if advised.
March 18, 2026
Rishabh
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
RISHABH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…