Vakil Singh Thakur vs Union Of India
2023 Latest Caselaw 13644 MP

                                                           1
                           IN    THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                               AT JABALPUR
                                                     BEFORE
                                       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                              ON THE 22 nd OF AUGUST, 2023
                                              MISC. APPEAL No. 673 of 2022

                          BETWEEN:-
                          1.    VAKIL SINGH THAKUR S/O LATE SHRI VIJAY
                                SINGH RAJPUT, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
                                OCCUPATION: NIL R/O VILLAGE BAHERIYA
                                SAHNI POST BAHERIYA P.S. CANTT. DISTRICT
                                SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    KRIPAL SINGH S/O LATE SHRI VIJAY SINGH
                                RAJPUT, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                                NIL R/O VILLAGE BAHERIYA SAHNI POST
                                BAHERIYA P.S. CANTT. DISTRICT SAGAR M.P.
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          3.    AVTAAR SINGH S/O LATE SHRI VIJAY SINGH
                                RAJPUT, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                                NIL R/O VILLAGE BAHERIYA SAHNI POST
                                BAHERIYA P.S. CANTT. DISTRICT SAGAR M.P.
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....PETITIONER
                          (BY MS. APARNA SINGH - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          UNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER
                          WEST CENTRAL RAIILWAY JABALPUR MP (MADHYA
                          PRADESH)

                                                                                    .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI SANDEEP KUMAR SHUKLA - ADVOCATE)

                                Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
                          following:
                                                            ORDER

This appeal is filed by the claimants being aggrieved of judgment dated 07.01.2022, passed by learned Claims Tribunal, Bhopal Bench, Bhopal (M.P.), Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHWANI PRAJAPATI Signing time: 8/24/2023 3:48:57 PM

in O.A./IIu/BPL/260/2018, whereby, learned Technical Member of Railway Claims Tribunal has dismissed the claim on twin grounds that nobody had seen the deceased falling from the train and if she would have fallen from the train on the station platform, then surely she would have been noticed by co-passengers and railway personnel. Thus, on the basis of such surmises and conjectures and on the basis of the findings of the DRM report, claim has been rejected.

Learned counsel for appellants submits that evidence of Vishan Singh Dangi (AW/2) was led, who categorically deposed that he had purchased the ticket for the deceased Sheetal Rani and made her sit in the general bogie of the train moving towards Sagar.

It is submitted that once it is accepted that the incident which took place was an untoward incident, then onus shifted on the Railway Authorities to prove that whether non-recovery of ticket is sufficient to defeat the claim. Reliance is placed on the judgment of Andhra Pradesh High Court in Union of India Vs. Shanta Bai and others [2012 (1) TAC 916 (AP)], wherein, it is held that mere absence of recovery of ticket from the body of the deceased does not by itself lead to a conclusion to the contrary that is he is not a bona fide passenger.

Similarly reliance is placed on the decision of M.P. High Court in Devkabai wd/o Ganpat and others Vs. Union of India (AIR 2006 MP 201), wherein, it is held that "there can be many reasons due to which the ticket could not be traced. It cannot be ruled out that the deceased was having a ticket in his hand and when he fell down, the ticket was misplaced.

Shri Sandeep Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for Union of India supports the award and submits that no indulgence is required.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHWANI PRAJAPATI Signing time: 8/24/2023 3:48:57 PM

Learned Tribunal has inappropriately appreciated the evidence of daughter-in-law of the deceased Smt. Rabina Bai. There is no contradiction in the dates. It is crystal clear that on 23.04.2018 at about 1:30 P.M. to 2:00 P.M., her mother-in-law i.e. the deceased had left the town to visit Village Bilahra. On 24.4.2018, she was to return from Village Bilahra. Therefore, there is no contradiction in the evidence as has been mentioned by the learned Tribunal.

Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Kamukayi and others Vs. Union of India and others, decided on 16.05.2023 in Civil appeal No.3799/2023, arising out of SLP (C) No.17062/2022, has allowed the claim of the claimants referring to various judgments of different High Courts specially the one in case of Union of India Vs. Rina Devi [(2019) 3 SCC 572], so also in case of Union of India Vs. Radha Yadav [(2019) 3 SCC 410].

Thus, merely on the ground of non-availability of ticket or failure of the authorities to recover the ticket, in the light of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kamukayi (supra) and others, so also its earlier judgment in Rina Devi (supra) and Radha Yadav (supra), so also the M.P. High Court in Devkabai (supra), this Court is of the opinion that learned Tribunal erred in not considering the evidence of Vishan Singh Dangi (AW/2) and not granting compensation in favour of the claimants.

Accordingly, impugned award is, hereby, set aside. It is directed that

Railway Authorities shall pay the compensation in favour of the claimants. This amount of compensation shall remain invested in the joint names of the claimants in a monthly Scheme of Indian Post office or a Nationalised Bank for a period of at least five years. Claimants will be entitled to use its monthly interest, so accrued, but not the principal amount.

Signature Not Verified In above terms, appeal is allowed and disposed of. Signed by: ASHWANI PRAJAPATI Signing time: 8/24/2023 3:48:57 PM

Record of Claims Tribunal be sent back.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE A.Praj.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHWANI PRAJAPATI Signing time: 8/24/2023 3:48:57 PM