Babu Nath Singh & Ors. vs Union Of India
2014 Latest Caselaw 2508 Del

*            IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                         FAO No.140/2012

%                                                     16th May, 2014

BABU NATH SINGH & ORS.                                      ..... Appellants
                  Through:               Mr. S.K. Vashisht, Advocate.

                          Versus

UNION OF INDIA                                        ..... Respondent
                          Through:       Counsel for the respondent
                                         (appearance not given).

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA

To be referred to the Reporter or not?


VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)

1.           This first appeal is filed under Section 23 of the Railway

Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 impugning the judgment of the Tribunal

dated 16.12.2011 by which the claim petition filed by the appellants

seeking statutory compensation of Rs.4 lacs has been dismissed.

2.           The case as pleaded by the appellants was that Sh. Krishan

Kumar Singh, son of the appellant no.1, was travelling on 1.10.2008

from New Delhi to Chhapra (Bihar) by the Lichhawi Express on journey

ticket no.Y3606166. It is pleaded that when the train reached Sahibabad

railway station, Sh. Krishan Kumar Singh fell down from the running
FAO 140/2012                                                    Page 1 of 4
 train due to jerk of the train and thrust from the passengers. Sh. Krishan

Kumar Singh is stated to have died as a result of the injuries sustained

on account of falling down from the train.

              I may note, at this stage, that Sahibabad is part of

Ghaziabad and is situated right at the eastern border of Delhi and

therefore the case of the appellant is that immediately after the journey

commenced at Delhi the deceased fell down soon thereafter near the

Sahibabad railway station at the border of Delhi.

3.            The Railway Claims Tribunal has dismissed the claim

petition by giving the following three main reasons:-

(i)           The first reason is that the deceased was said to be allegedly

travelling with his mother Smt. Radhika Devi, but she was not brought

into the witness box in support of the case of the appellants.

(ii)          The second reason which is given is that there is no proof of

fall from the train of Sh. Krishan Kumar Singh more so because no one

has seen Sh. Krishan Kumar Singh falling from the train i.e the Tribunal

holds that the train journey allegedly undertaken was not proved to be

undertaken.

(iii)         The third reason is that though the deceased Sh. Krishan

Kumar Singh was travelling with his mother Smt. Radhika Devi, the
FAO 140/2012                                                     Page 2 of 4
 ticket which is filed on record shows travel of only one person, and

therefore, the ticket (Ex.AW1/8) is a procured ticket and consequently

Sh. Krishan Kumar Singh was not a bonafide passenger travelling on a

train.

4.           I completely agree with the aforesaid conclusions of the

Tribunal because two ingredients are required to be established before

the Tribunal for a claim petition to be successful. The first is that the

deceased must be a bonafide passenger and secondly that falling from

the train has to be established. In the present case, the ticket filed by the

appellants has been rightly disbelieved because the ticket is only of one

person whereas as per the own case of the appellants, two persons were

travelling by the train being the deceased Sh. Krishan Kumar Singh and

his mother Smt. Radhika Devi. Also, there is no proof of a fall from the

train i.e that a train journey was undertaken, and which aspect is rightly

held against the appellants because the journey by train of Sh. Krishan

Kumar Singh is not proved. I would like to give an additional reason and

which in my opinion is that it is very strange that Smt. Radhika Devi, the

mother who was alleged to be travelling with the deceased Sh. Krishan

Kumar Singh not only has not been said to have made any efforts to

locate her son, but also that she probably has proceeded to her residence
FAO 140/2012                                                    Page 3 of 4
 right till Chhapra in Bihar although her son who was travelling with her

did not reach with her at the train destination at Chhapra in Bihar. In my

opinion, it is clear that the claim petition is a fraudulent petition because

neither was there any train travel and nor did the deceased Sh. Krishan

Kumar Singh fall from the train. The ticket filed is actually a procured

ticket and the facts and circumstances show that there is absolutely no

'untoward incident' as per the meaning of the expression as found in

Section 123(c) and Section 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989.

5.           In view of the above, there is no merit in the appeal, and the

same is therefore dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.




MAY 16, 2014                                   VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.

Ne