Sagar Chawda vs The Union Of India
2023 Latest Caselaw 4469 MP

                                                            1
                          IN       THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                     BEFORE
                                       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                               ON THE 21 st OF MARCH, 2023
                                               MISC. APPEAL No. 2284 of 2021

                         BETWEEN:-
                         SAGAR CHAWDA S/O SHRI DINESH CHAWDA R/O
                         GRAM RAHATGAON, WARD NO.4, DISTRICT HARDA
                         M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....APPELLANT
                         (BY SHRI K.JAGGI - ADVOCATE)

                         AND
                         THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE GENERAL
                         MANAGER WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY JABALPUR M.P.
                         (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                   .....RESPONDENT
                         (BY SHRI VISHAL MAURYA - ADVOCATE)

                               T h is appeal coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
                         following:
                                                            ORDER

This Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 23 of the Railways Claims

Tribunal Act, 1989 is filed by Appellant/Claimant Sagar Chawda being aggrieved of judgment dated 31.1.2020 passed by learned Member (Technical), Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhopal Bench, Bhopal in Case No.O.A.No.IIu/BPL/82/2019 rejecting his claim on arbitrary and hypothetical grounds contrary to the D.R.M Report Annexure R-1/1.

Learned counsel for the Appellant/Claimant submits that one leg of the Appellant/Claimant was amputated due to the untoward incident and he is

Signature Not Verified entitled to be adequately compensated in terms of the provisions of the Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time:

3/21/2023 7:37:29 PM

Railways Act, 1989.

Learned counsel for the respondent/West Central Railway submits that there was contradiction in the version of the Appellant/Claimant as to the fall. On one hand, he deposes that he was travelling with a Mobile Phone in his one hand when somebody standing on the track had snatched his Mobile Phone, as a result of which, he had fallen down from the Train and on the other hand, he deposes that he was washing his hands after answering the call of the nature when he was pushed to the track. No travel ticket was recovered from his body and he has produced a photocopy of the travel ticket, which is not to be believed.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the so called D.R.M Report Annexure R-1/1, it is evident that as per the D.R.M Report, which is based on the Station Diary, true copy of T.S.R, one person had fallen down from the Train No.11058 at Kilometer 799/3-4, which was informed to the Station Master by Guard Dashrath Singh and Driver Anand Dongre both belonging to the Headquarter Jhansi at 12.36 hours. Thereafter, the intimation was given to the B.M.O Obedullaganj Shri Yadav on his Mobil Phone at 1.48 hours. Due to the said incident, the Train got delayed by 25 minutes. Thus, the factum of fall from the Train and incurring injury/disability is proved by the D.R.M.Report itself.

Now the only course, which remains open is in regard to the recovery of the journey ticket. Admittedly, the Appellant/Claimant was taken to the Hospital and till then no Panchnama was made from his body. Due to the amputation of leg, there was heavy bleeding and the Appellant/Claimant was not conscious and, therefore, he was not responsible for the whereabouts on his body. If he Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time:

3/21/2023 7:37:29 PM

had a photocopy of the journey ticket preserved in his baggage and that was produced then that cannot be the sole ground to discard a genuine and just claim. The approach of the Railway Claims Tribunal appears to be unjust, hypothetical and inhuman. The Railway Claims Tribunal has not acted pragmatically and has not passed the impugned judgment based on the true facts & circumstances of the case, which are corroborated from the D.R.M.Report Annexure R-1/1. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned judgment dated 31.1.2020 passed by learned Member (Technical), Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhopal Bench, Bhopal in Case No.O.A.No.IIu/BPL/82/2019 treating the incident to be not an untoward incident is incorrect and is hereby quashed.

As far as the journey ticket is concerned, its number is mentioned on the claim. Thus, the onus was on the West Central Railway to disprove that the Appellant/Claimant was not travelling on the said journey ticket. but no such onus was discharged by them.

Taking into consideration all these facts and circumstances of the case and especially the D.R.M. Report Annexure R-1/1, the impugned judgment dated 31.1.2020 passed by learned Member (Technical), Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhopal Bench, Bhopal in Case No.O.A.No.IIu/BPL/82/2019 deserves to and is hereby quashed. The matter is remitted to the Railway Claims Tribunal

to decide the quantum of compensation payable under such circumstances, which they may calculate within a period of thirty days and pay it to the Appellant/Claimant within a further period of thirty days.

In above terms, this Miscellaneous Appeal stands allowed & disposed of.

Record, if any, be sent back.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time:

3/21/2023 7:37:29 PM

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE amit

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time:

3/21/2023 7:37:29 PM