THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.452 OF 2016
JUDGMENT:
Aggrieved by the dismissal Order passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench (for brevity, 'the Tribunal'), in OA II (U) No.307 of 2008, dated 18.03.2016, the applicant Nos.1 to 4 have preferred the present appeal.
2. For the sake of convenience, hereinafter, the parties will be referred as per their array before the Tribunal.
3. The brief facts of the case are that, the applicants who are wife, minor children and mother of the deceased-P.Jyothi Kumar @ Jyothi (hereinafter will be referred as 'deceased') filed an application under Section 16 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 seeking compensation of Rs.8 lakhs on account of the death of the deceased, who died in an untoward incident that occurred on 27.08.2008. On 27.08.2008 night the deceased along with his elder brother Abraham and his sister Esther Rani went to Nellore Railway station. The deceased and his brother gave send off to their sister to Hyderabad by Narayanadri Express and thereafter the deceased purchased one journey ticket for himself from Nellore to Tirupati to have darshan of Lord Venkateshwara Swamy. After some time the deceased boarded train No.7230 Sabari Express in a general 2 MGP,J Cma_452_2016 compartment and while travelling, when the train was passing between Nellore and Vedayapalem railway stations, the deceased accidentally slipped and fell down from the train at about 10-50 P.M., sustained injuries and died. The journey ticket of the deceased is stated to have been lost during the accident. Hence the claim.
4. The respondent-Railways filed written statement along with Divisional Railway manager's report denying the averments of the application and contended that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger and his death was not on account of any untoward incident as alleged. Hence, prayed to dismiss the application.
5. Based on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues:
1. Whether the applicants are dependents of the deceased?
2. Whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger of train No.7230 Sabari Express while travelling from Nellore to Tirupati on 27.8.2008?
3. Whether the deceased died as a result of an untoward incident of accidental fall from the said train?
4. To what relief?
6. Before the Tribunal, on behalf of the applicants, A.W.1 and got marked Exs.A.1 to A.7. On behalf of respondent-railways, no witness was examined, however, Divisional Railway Manager's report was marked as Ex.R1.
3 MGP,J
Cma_452_2016
7. The Tribunal after considering the evidence on record, both oral and documentary, has dismissed the application. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants/applicants have filed the present appeal.
8. Heard Sri M.Lakshma Reddy, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Krishna Kishore Kovvuri, learned Standing Counsel for the Railways and perused the record.
9. The main contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is that though the applicants proved their case by examining AW.1 and relying on the documents under Exs.A.1 to A7, the tribunal without considering the same, has erroneously dismissed the application. Hence, prayed to allow the appeal by awarding the just and reasonable compensation.
10. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent- Railways submitted that the Tribunal, after considering all the aspects, has rightly dismissed the application. Hence, interference of this Court is not necessary.
11. Now the point for consideration is whether the order passed by the learned Commissioner is sustainable under law? POINT:
12. This Court has perused the entire material available on record. Applicant No.1 who is the wife of the deceased was 4 MGP,J Cma_452_2016 examined as AW.1 and has reiterated the averments of the application. According to AW.1, on the date of incident the deceased along with his brother Abraham went to the Nellore Railway station to give send off to his sister Esther Rani. After giving send off to his sister, he purchased journey ticket in the presence of his brother Abraham to go to Tirupati for having darshan of Lord Venkateshwara Swamy and boarded train No.7230 Sabari Express in a general compartment. During the journey when the train was passing between Nellore and Vedayapalem railway stations, the deceased accidentally slipped and fell down from the train at about 10-50 p.m., sustained injuries and died. Admittedly, she is not an eyewitness to the incident or purchasing journey ticket by the deceased. Further no independent witness was examined by the applicants in support of their case. The applicants also failed to examine the brother of the deceased viz., Abraham, who witnessed the purchasing of journey ticket by the deceased. Thus, the question of purchasing journey ticket by the deceased is doubtful.
13. Further Ex.A1 F.I.R. discloses that on the basis of the message received from the Station Superintendent, Nellore, which is based on the information given by the Keyman of Unit No.7 on 30.8.2008 at 11-00 hours that he found a male dead body at KM No.172/35-173/1, 10 meters away from up line opposite Siddu Hospital. According to Ex.A2 Inquest report, one pocket note book 5 MGP,J Cma_452_2016 containing cell phone numbers, some papers, one identification card issued by Srinivasa Outsourcing Services Private Limited, Hyderabad with photograph and at a distance of 3 meters on upline track right black chappal, blue colour ball pen and one steel nail cutter were found and the dead body was found 6 meters away from the track, but no journey ticket was recovered from the deceased. Further though the brother of the deceased-Abraham was examined by the police at the time of inquest, he did not state anything about the journey ticket to the police. Ex.A3 postmortem examination report shows that the deceased sustained 1) crush injury of left half of the skull, face, left eye, 2) multiple fractures of the skull bones, left temporal, parietal, occipital bones, maxilla, mandible at multiple sites including skull bones, 3) lacerated injuries over middle 1/3rdof thigh on left side and 4) fracture of the left femur lower end above the knee joint and other internal injuries. Further it shows the time of death as 5 to 7 days prior to postmortem examination which was conducted on 31.8.2008.
14. On behalf of the respondent-Railways, no witness was examined, however, Divisional Railway Manager's report marked as Ex.R1, wherein it was concluded that, the deceased was not a bona fide passenger and no such incident of fall of the passenger from the train was reported to the railway authorities by anyone and the nature of injuries, would indicate that it is not a case of accidental 6 MGP,J Cma_452_2016 fall from the train since all other articles were found intact with the deceased except the journey ticket. In view of the above facts and circumstances, it is clearly established through the evidence of AW.1 coupled with the documents filed by them that the applicants failed to discharge their initial burden of proving that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger and no body witnessed while the deceased fallen down from the train. Hence, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Railway Claims Tribunal has discussed the evidence available on record in detail and came to a correct conclusion and rightly dismissed the claim application. Thus, there are no grounds to interfere with the findings of the Tribunal and the appeal is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed.
15. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending Miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
______________________________ JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI 18.11.2023 PGP