Jharkhand High Court
Ashok Kumar Puri & Anr vs Union Of India on 1 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
(Civil Miscellaneous Appellate Jurisdiction)
M.A. No. 18 of 2020
......
Ashok Kumar Puri & Anr. ...... Appellants
Versus
Union of India, through the General Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur
......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO
(Through : Video Conferencing)
For the Appellants : Ms. Chaitali C. Sinha, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, Advocate
-----
04/Dated: 01/02/2021.
Heard, learned counsel for the parties.
Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that claim application of the
appellants has been dismissed in terms of order dated 19.06.2019 passed by
Member/Technical, Railway Claims Tribunal, Ranchi Bench, Ranchi in Case
No.OA(IIU)/RNC/83/2018 on the ground that no valid ticket was found and the
evidence led by the AW-2 and AW-3 do not prove that deceased was travelling with
a valid ticket and there was contradiction in the claim application and the deposition
of AW-2 and AW-3, as such, the deceased was not a bona-fide passenger nor the
occurrence took place in an untoward incident because of the contradictions in
evidence of AW-2 and AW-3.
Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that there is delay of
96 days in preferring the appeal and for condonation of the same, I.A. No.3762 of
2020 has been preferred, as such, same may be condoned as this Court has granted
time to the Railways on 23.11.2020 to file counter-affidavit by way of last chance,
but no counter-affidavit has been filed.
Learned counsel for the respondent/Railway has submitted that the learned
Tribunal has passed the impugned order on the basis of the materials available on
record, which does not require any interference by this Court, as such, this Court
may call for LCR.
Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that AW-3 (Santosh Kumar
Bharti) has categorically stated in his evidence at para 2 that he had seen the
deceased, Ashwani Kumar Puri purchasing a railway ticket from Koderma to Gaya
and boarded Jan Shatabdi Express Train No.12366. This witness has further stated in
his evidence that he met with Ashwani Kumar Puri while purchasing ticket. The
train vendor disclosed that one person fell down between Bandhua and Manpur Jn.
On the next day he got information that Ashwani Kumar Puri has fell down and on
the basis of written report of father of deceased, Ashok Kumar Puri, an FIR has been
lodged.
Chhotu Warsi has been examined as AW-2 and this witness has also stated in
his evidence at paras 2, 3, 4, and 5 which are reproduced herein:-
"2- ;g fd eSa e`rd vf'ouh dqekj iqjh dks dksMjek ls x;k ta- rd dk jsy fVdV [kjhndj
tu'krkCnh ,Dl- Vsªu ij p<+rs gq, ns[kk FkkA
3-;g fd eSa vius nksLr larks"k Hkkjrh ds lkFk tu'krkCnh ,Dl- Vsªu ls dksMjek ls x;k tk jgs
Fks eSa nwljh cksxh esa p<k FkkA tcfd e`rd vf'ouh dqekj Hkkjrh nwljh cksxh esa p<+k FkkA
4- ;g fd tu 'krkCnh ,Dl- Vªsu esa gYyk gqbZ Fkh fd cU/kqvk&ekuiqj ta- ds chp pyrh xkM+h ls
,d ;k=h fxj x;k gSA
5- ;g fd ?kVuk dh tkudkjh fnukad 14-08-2017 dks x;k esa eq>s ekyqe gqvk fd fxjusokyk
;k=h e`rd vf'ouh dqekj iqjh gh FkkA"
Ashok Kumar Puri has been examined as AW-1, he is father of the deceased
( Ashwani Kumar Puri) and has categorically stated in his evidence at para 5 that
Santosh Bharti and Chhotu Warsi have disclosed that his son had purchased the
ticket and boarded Jan Shatabdi Express train at Koderma for Gaya.
Learned counsel for the appellant has thus submitted though there are
discrepancies in column no.7 of the claim application which have cropped up
because of typographical error and not because of any other reason as there is
consistent evidence that the deceased was travelling from Koderma to Gaya Railway
Station. The evidence of A.W.1, A.W.2 and A.W.3 are consistent, as such, impugned
judgment may be set aside.
Learned counsel for the respondent-Railway has submitted that by way of last
chance, one more indulgence may be granted to the Railway because of pandemic
Covid-19, counter-affidavit could not be filed and further submitted that L.C.R. may
be called for.
Considering the rival submissions of the parties, looking into the facts and
circumstances, call for the LCR from the court of Member/Technical, Railway
Claims Tribunal, Ranchi Bench, Ranchi in connection with OA(IIU)/RNC/83/2018.
In the meantime, learned counsel for the respondent-Railway is directed to
file counter-affidavit in both matter i.e. in limitation matter as well as in memo of
appeal.
Put up this case when the physical court starts.
(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)
R.S-
