Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

44. As per the provisions as they stood at the time when the cause of action arose Section 82(C) provided for preferring a claim before the Claims Commissioner within a period of one year from the date of the accident. The Commissioner was not clothed with any power or authority to condone the delay after the lapse of period of one year. Having regard to this position, the application even if it were to be made before the amendment came into force could only have been examined under the provisions of Section 82(A) and 82(C) of the Indian Railways Act, 1890. At any rate, if it were the case of the appellant that the accident arose on account of and negligence on the part of the Railway Administration, then the remedy open to them was to file a suit before the Civil Court to maintain an action for tortious liability. The argument of the learned counsel for the appellant Sri. Kedilaya stating that having regard to the fact that now the Claims Tribunal are given the power and jurisdiction which was otherwise vested in the Civil Court, the claim now made should be treated as a claim made on the strength of the common law right and the tortious liability that the Railway Administration is required to answer is concerned, it is to be stated that neither the pleadings nor the context in which the claim has been made support such a contention. This contention has no basis either in the pleadings or in the evidence. Therefore, the same cannot be entertained. The various decisions which the learned counsel for the appellant has cited with regard to the limitation do not require to be referred to or noticed, having regard to the fact that we have already held that the claim itself is not maintainable. In the result, we pass the following.