[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Union Of India Through By The General ... vs Bhola Prasad Burnwal Aged 70 Years ... on 20 January, 2026
Author: Rajesh Kumar
Bench: Rajesh Kumar
2026:JHHC:1541
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M.A. No. 398 of 2025
Union of India through by the General Manager, Eastern Railway, Kolkata
having Office at 17, Netaji Subhas Bose Road, P.O. Netaji Subhas Road, P.S.-
Netaji Police Station, Kolkata -700001, West Bengal
............Appellant(s)
Vrs.
1.Bhola Prasad Burnwal aged 70 years father of deceased Sunil Kumar
Burnwal
2.Sumitra Devi Burnwal, aged about 64 years, Mother of deceased Sunil
Kumar Burnwal
3.Madhuri Burnwal, aged about 45 years wife of deceased Sunil Kumar
Burnwal
4.Aayushman, aged about 09 years, minor Son of deceased Sunil Kumar
Burnwal, represented through his mother and natural guardian, Respondent
No. 3 (Madhuri Burnwal)
All Resident of village/ Mohalla- Court Road Prem Dham, Post Office and
Police Station- Jamtara, District-Jamtara-815351 (Jharkhand)
.......... Respondent(s)
.......
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
For the Appellant(s) : Mrs. Nitu Sinha, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate
03/20.01.2026 The present appeal has been preferred by the Union of India
against the judgment dated 18.12.2024 passed by the Learned
Member Judicial and Learned Member Technical, Railway Claims
Tribunal Ranchi Bench at Ranchi in Claim Application No.
OA(11U)/RNC/4/2024 whereby the Tribunal has allowed the claim
application of the dependent of the deceased i.e., applicants/
respondents herein directing the Respondents/ appellant to pay
compensation amount of Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs only) to
the applicants / respondents along with simple interest @ 9% per
annum from the date of incident on 27.08.2023 till the date of
judgment.
2. From the pleadings it appears that it has been claimed that the
victim being a Bonafide passenger, suffered accident on 27.08.2023
while travelling through train having valid second-class journey ticket
No. UTQ24283532.
2026:JHHC:1541
3. The Railway Claim Tribunal has framed five issues, which read
as under:
1. Whether this case comes under the jurisdiction of Ranchi
Bench?
2. Whether the deceased was Bonafide passenger as alleged?
3. Whether the deceased died due to an alleged untoward
incident?
4. Whether the applicant or other dependents of the deceased
are entitled to compensation?
5. Relief?
4. All the issues have been declared in favour of the victim and as
such, the amount has been awarded.
5. Now the Railway authorities have filed the present appeal
having a delay of 44 days. The delay in filing the appeal is only
procedural in nature i.e., lethargic attitude of the Government.
6. So far as merit is concerned, it has been submitted by the
learned counsel for the appellant that the body has been found in the
loop line and it may have been caused due to other reason and not due
to fall.
7. This is nothing but merely on the basis of conjecture and
surmises, while the factual finding has been recorded by the Tribunal
on the basis of materials on record. Paragraph no. 16 of the impugned
judgment has been specifically stressed and I have gone through it.
8. Thus, the Railway Tribunal has rightly arrived at the findings so
recorded and as such, this Court finds no reason to entertain the
present appeal.
2026:JHHC:1541
9. Accordingly, the present appeal stands dismissed.
10. However, delay in preferring the appeal is condoned and I.A.
No. 11098 of 2025 to that effect stands allowed. Consequently, I.A.
No. 11096 of 2025 seeking stay also stands disposed of.
(Rajesh Kumar, J.)
20.01.2026
A. Mohanty
Uploaded
____/____/2026
