The Union Of India vs Shaikh Chand Pasha
2013 Latest Caselaw 275 Bom

                            1                                fa935.13.odt




                                                                   
                                           
       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,




                                          
                    NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR




                               
                  FIRST APPEAL NO.935 OF 2013
                 
                
     The Union of India,
     Through the General Manager,
     South Central Railway,
     Secunderabad.                ..........      APPELLANT
      
   



         // VERSUS //


     Shaikh Chand Pasha s/o, 





     Shaikh Shabbir, Age about 30 yrs.,
     Occ. Labour, r/o. Daryapur,
     Navipeth, Distt.Nazamabad (AP)........... RESPONDENT





     -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
              Mr.N.P.Lambat, Adv. for the Appellant.
            Mr.Anil B. Bambal, Adv. for the Respondent.
      -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-




                                           ::: Downloaded on - 23/12/2013 20:32:21 :::
                                  2                                   fa935.13.odt

                                CORAM     :  A.P.BHANGALE,  J.

                                DATE         :  4.12.2013. 




                                                   
     ORAL JUDGMENT      :

1. This appeal is preferred against the Judgment and

Award dated 21st September, 2010 delivered by Railway

Claims Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur in Claim

Application No.1/OA-II/RCT/NGP/2009 whereby the

Member (Judicial) of the Tribunal was pleased to allow the

Claim Application and granted compensation in the sum of

Rs.3,20,000/- with interest payable thereof @ 6 % p.a.

from the date of application till the date of realisation.

2. The facts, briefly stated, are as under :

That the respondent (Claim applicant) Sk. Chand

Pasha Sk. Shabbir was travelling from Nanded to Navi Peth

Railway Station by Nanded Kachiguda passenger Train

No.594 on 19.8.2008., The claim applicant was travelling

along with his friend Sk. Shadul. The claim applicant had

3 fa935.13.odt

purchased ticket bearing no.62615964 from Nanded to

Navi Peth. It is the case of the applicant that he fell down

from the train when the train was near Mudkhed Railway

Station due to sudden jerk and heavy rush in the train

compartment. In the result, there was amputation of his

right hand and two fingers of his left hand. The Railway

Administration opposed the claim on the ground that it

cannot be termed as an untoward incident within the

meaning of Section 123 (c) of the Indian Railways Act,

1989. It is also contended that it was a self inflicted injury

and therefore, the claim applicant was not entitled to

receive compensation.

3. I have considered the submissions advanced on behalf

of the appellant. In the light of evidence led on record as

also the record and proceedings, it is unfortunate that the

claim applicant had suffered grievous injury to his right

hand resulting in amputation of his right hand as also loss

of two fingers of left hand. The proceedings would indicate

that the claim applicant had relied upon his evidence

4 fa935.13.odt

permitted on affidavit, railway ticket which he had taken

for journey from Nanded to Navi Peth on the day of

incident and police papers such as spot panchanama,

statements recorded by the Railway Police as also medical

papers such as Disability Certificate, which was assessed at

50 % by the Civil Surgeon and Medical Board, Shri Guru

Govind Singh Memorial hospital, Nanded as also the

Certificate issued by Dr. Vijay Chinchani, Vijay Orthopeadic

hospital regarding amputation from 4 ½ inch below tip of

otecranon on right side and loss of index as well as middle

finger of left hand by the claimant. According to the

claimant, he had informed Railway employee as well as

police about occurrence of incident. On behalf of the

claimant one witness Mr. Y. Sanayas Naidu, Booking Clerk

from Nanded Railway Station was also examined, who

proved that the ticket was issued by him, with which he

was confronted and it was valid till 12.00 hours of

midnight. The contention that the Railway Administration

disputed validity of the Railway ticket is unfounded as the

Booking clerk himself examined in the case deposed about

5 fa935.13.odt

issuance of ticket by him, although he contended that the

ticket issued by him is not valid. He admitted that he had

sold railway ticket Exh.A.W.1/1 and also admitted that

there was no specific mention on the ticket Exh.A.W.1/1

that it was for train no.564 only. Under these

circumstances, within the meaning of Section 123(c)(2) of

the Indian Railways Act, accidentally falling of any

passenger from the train carrying passengers is covered

within the definition of "untoward incident". Railway

Administration is under obligation to plead and prove the

exception if it intends to take benefit or shelter under

exception provided for in Section 124-A of the Indian

Railways Act. Such a plea must be made in reply to the

Claim application and specific evidence ought to be led to

defeat the Claim application. Otherwise the Railway

Administration cannot escape from its statutory liability of

payment of compensation as per the Schedule of Railway

Accidents and Untoward Incidents (Compensation) Rules,

1990. Perusal of the Schedule would indicate that for

amputation from 4½ inches below tip of otecranon or for

6 fa935.13.odt

loss of hand or thumb and four fingers of one hand,

compensation provided for is in the sum of Rs.2,40,000/-

while compensation in the sum of Rs.80,000/- is provided

for loss of two fingers of one hand. Cumulatively for

injuries suffered in the present case, the Railway Tribunal

was well within its jurisdiction to grant compensation in the

sum of Rs.3,20,000/- as also simple interest @ 6 % p.a.

from the date of application till realisation of the amount.

4. The learned Counsel for the respondent took me

through the impugned Judgment and Award along with the

record and proceedings. It does appear that the Railway

Administration failed to plead and prove exception so as to

escape statutory liability to compensate the respondent. The

learned Member of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur

Bench awarded compensation on the basis of well reasoned

and sound judgment and therefore, it does not require any

interference in exercise of appellate jurisdiction. Hence, the

appeal is dismissed.

7 fa935.13.odt

If any amount is deposited by the appellant, same

shall be transferred to the Railway Claims Tribunal for

disbursal of the same to the claimant.

JUDGE

jaiswal