THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.528 OF 2018
JUDGMENT:
Aggrieved by the Order dated 11-10-2017 in O.A (II) (U) No.103 of 2011 passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, the applicant in the said OA preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
2. According to the grounds urged by the appellant in the present appeal, the main grievance of the applicant is that the Tribunal below adopted very narrow minded approach, in spite of the fact that the Act is beneficial piece of legislation. Thereby they sought for setting aside the Order and sought for an opportunity.
3. According to the Judgment filed along with the appeal and as per other record, it shows that O.A (II) (U) No.103 of 2011 has been filed by the applicant herein for compensation on account of sustaining injuries in an untoward incident.
4. The said petition was filed with an allegation that the appellant with a view to go to Bangalore to attend coolie work, SSRN,J 2 C.M.A.No.528 of 2018 went to Kurnool Town railway station, in the night of 03-04-2010, purchased a 2nd class train journey ticket bearing No.37292094 from Kurnool to Bangalore and boarded Train No.2785 Kachiguda - Bangalore, while traveling, the applicant due to heavy rush of passengers, accidentally slipped and fell down from the running train in between Gooty - Ramarajupally railway station near Chiruthanda Village at about 1.30 hrs., and he sustained severe head injury along with other multiple injuries all over the body due to speed, jolts and sudden jerks of train.
5. The respondent opposed the claim and filed written statement denying the material averments of the petition and put the applicant to strict proof of his case.
6. On the basis of the rival contentions, issues have been framed and matter was adjourned from time to time, for trial. However, on 11-10-2017 the application of the appellant herein was dismissed in view of the non-prosecution of the case.
7. It appears from the record that a memo was filed by the learned counsel for the applicant to refer the matter to Lokadalath and the same memo was filed without any consent of SSRN,J 3 C.M.A.No.528 of 2018 the respondent. Therefore, the memo was not accepted and in view of the circular from the Registrar, Railway Claims Tribunal, New Delhi vide Circular No.RCT/DLI/ Secunderabad/96 dated 26.12.2005 and in view of Section 15 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 and also basing on Judgment of High Court of Karnataka in W.P.No.36935 of 20001, the application of the applicant was dismissed vide separate Order.
8. The appellant has filed the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal against the said Order and the learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that no proper opportunity was given to the appellant herein to submit his case before the Tribunal. Learned counsel has further submitted that the appellant and other persons who filed similar applications filed a memo before the Tribunal with a request to refer the matter before Lokadalath and it was bonafide request and therefore sought for an opportunity to contest their claim.
9. As could be seen from the Order challenged in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, it shows that though the matter was adjourned from time to time for number of 1 AIR 2001 Karnataka 504 SSRN,J 4 C.M.A.No.528 of 2018 adjournments, the appellant herein did not choose to produce any evidence.
10. Learned counsel representing the respondent herein submitted that there are no bonafides in the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and that the application itself is a fake claim and the same is liable to be dismissed.
11. It may be true that the appellant failed to adduce evidence inspite of number of adjournments but the application cannot be decided without giving any opportunity. The appellant is entitled to fair chance of producing evidence and proving his claim. Therefore, it is a fit case for remanding the matter to the Tribunal below, with a specific direction to dispose the same on merits by giving opportunity to both parties.
12. In view of the above discussion, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed by remanding the matter to the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, and in O.A (II) (U) No.103 of 2011 is restored. The Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench is directed to dispose of the above OA by giving reasonable opportunity to both parties, for adducing evidence and submitting their respective arguments. The SSRN,J 5 C.M.A.No.528 of 2018 Tribunal shall dispose of the OA within 6 (Six) months from the date of receipt of records.
As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. No costs.
_____________________ SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU, J Date: 21-09-2022 PLV SSRN,J 6 C.M.A.No.528 of 2018 SSRN,J 7 C.M.A.No.528 of 2018 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.152 OF 2021 Dated: 05-Jul-2022 KHRM