Gujarat High Court
Union Of India vs Madhuben Chatrasingbhai Padhyar on 25 November, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17990/2022 ORDER DATED: 25/11/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17990 of 2022
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2024
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17990 of 2022
================================================================
UNION OF INDIA
Versus
MADHUBEN CHATRASINGBHAI PADHYAR & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
MS ARCHANA U AMIN(2462) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR RATHIN P RAVAL(5013) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 25/11/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate for the petitioner. It is submitted
that the petitioner has filed original claim petition being
O.A./2016/0299 before the Railway Claims Tribunal,
Ahmedabad ["Tribunal" for short] seeking compensation for the
death of the deceased Chatrasing Bharatbhai Padhyar due to
alleged untoward incident which has occurred on 20.8.2016
between Kosad and Gothangam Railway Station by accidentally
falling down from Train No.14708 DN Bandra Terminus -
Bikaner Ranakpur Express Train on the ground that the
deceased was a bonafide passenger travelling in the said train.
The Tribunal has issued notices on the said claim application.
That thereafter, the present writ petitioner - General Manager,
Western Railway, Mumbai has appeared and filed written
statement as well as statutory DRM report dated 19.4.2017
along with the investigation report of the railway police which
mentioned in the Panchnama that the deceased has died by
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17990/2022 ORDER DATED: 25/11/2024
undefined
falling down from any DN Train between Kosad - Gothangam
Railway Station. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further
submitted that the Tribunal has framed issues for determination
and has adjourned the case for evidence on 18.9.2017. That the
respondents have also filed evidence in form of affidavit along
with documentary evidence. He submits that after the evidence
has been taken, the respondents who are the heirs of the
deceased have moved application for amendment seeking to
amend the train "T/No.14708 DN Bandra Terminus-Bikaner
Ranakpur Express" by substituting it with the words "Any DN
Passenger train". He submits that the amendment application
was not maintainable since it had been preferred after the
evidence was brought on record by the petitioner herein. He
submits that by order dated 3.9.2021, the Tribunal has allowed
the said application and and Train "T/No.14708 DN Bandra
Terminus-Bikaner Ranakpur Express" is permitted to be
substituted with "Any DN Passenger train". He submits that
once the evidence has been recorded, the Tribunal has no power
to grant such an amendment. In support of his contention, he
has relied upon the judgment in case of Pandit Malhari Mahale v.
Monika Pandit Mahale & Ors. - (2020) 11 SCC 549 wherein
Hon'ble Apex Court has dismissed the amendment application as
there was no finding by the Court below that the party could not
introduced the amendment before the commencement of trial
inspite of due diligence.
2. In the present case, it is not disputed that the deceased
has died due to falling down from the train. The claimants before
the Tribunal had claimed that the deceased had fallen down
from the Train No.14708 DN Bandra Terminus-Bikaner
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17990/2022 ORDER DATED: 25/11/2024
undefined
Ranakpur Express. However, in the investigation done by the
petitioner, it is revealed that the name of the train could not be
identified and that he has fallen down from any DN Train. The
respondents herein are only seeking to amend the name of the
train as is revealed from the inquiry report of the petitioner.
There is no substantial change in the claim petition and the said
amendment also does not change any nature of the claim. The
claim of the respondents herein before the Tribunal will have to
be decided on its own merits and the amendment so granted will
not affect the merits of the claim. In the present case, the
deceased was travelling alone and had fallen down from the
passenger train. It was not reported by anybody. The dead body
had been seen lying on the track by the driver of another
subsequent train which was coming on the said track.
3. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the
amendment as allowed, does not prejudice the case of the
petitioner. The judgment relied upon by the learned advocate for
the petitioner is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of
the present case. The impugned order passed by the Tribunal
does not call for any interference. The present writ petition is
misconceived and without merits and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Notice is discharged. No order as to costs.
Connected Civil Application for stay also stands disposed
of.
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.)
KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN
