Orissa High Court
Kuber Bhutia And Others vs Union Of India on 18 April, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
FAO No.426 of 2022
Kuber Bhutia and Others .... Appellants
Ms. Deepali Mahapatra, Advocate
-versus-
Union of India, represented through its
General Manager, East Coast Railway,
Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar .... Respondent
Mr. Gyanaloka Mohanty, Central Government Counsel
CORAM:
SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
18.4.2023
Order No.
01. 1. The matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Heard Ms. D. Mahapatra, learned counsel for the claimant -
Appellants and Mr. G. Mohanty, learned Central Government Counsel
for Respondent - Union of India.
3. Present appeal by the claimants is directed against impugned
judgment dated 21st September, 2022 of the Member (Technical),
Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar Bench, Bhubaneswar passed
in OA-(IIU)/85/2019, wherein the tribunal has refused to grant any
compensation by disbelieving the case of the claimants.
4. Claimant's case is that the deceased while travelling in Hatia-
Puri Tapaswini express on 11th July, 2018 from Talcher to Puri,
accidentally fell from the running train in between Lingaraj PH and
Retanga Railway Station due to sudden jerk of the compartment and
push and pull of co-passengers. His dead body was recovered from the
railway track at KM No.440/29A-31A on UP line between BBS-RTN
Section. The dead body was bisected at the pelvic region between
upper limb and lower limb.
5. The claimants examined two witnesses, viz. A.W.1 and A.W.2
in support of their case. A.W.1 is the wife of the deceased and A.W.2
is the witness who has seen the deceased boarding the train after
purchasing journey ticket.
On the other hand the railways objected the claim on the ground
that no journey ticket was recovered from possession of the deceased
and bisection of the body justifies the case of run over by train. In
support of their case, they adduced one witness, viz. R.W.1, who is an
RPF person.
6. The tribunal upon adjudication has come to the finding that,
since no journey ticket was recovered from possession of the dead
body and no direct evidence has been produced regarding accidental
fall of the deceased from running train, the case of the claimants is not
established connecting any untoward incident.
7. It is seen that several documents including the police papers
prepared in connection with Bhubaneswar GRPS UD Case No.49 of
2018 have been relied on by both sides in support of their respective
stand. According to the post mortem report, the death of the deceased
is due to such injuries that could have been caused by hard and blunt
trauma consistent with railway accident. The police upon completion
of investigation have submitted the report in the UD case stating the
death of deceased due to accidental fall from running train. It is true
that no journey ticket was found from possession of the deceased and
no direct witness is there who has seen the alleged fall of the deceased
from running train. But at the same time, the evidence of P.W.2 who
has seen the deceased boarding the train after purchase of the journey
ticket stands un-rebutted. The circumstances reveal that the dead body
of the deceased was recovered from the railway track with such
injuries consistent with fall from train as per the opinion of post
mortem doctor. It cannot be expected in every case to have a direct
witness and in the case at hand, if the circumstances are analyzed
cumulatively the same do establish travelling of the deceased in Hatia-
Puri Express and his fall from the same.
8. The circumstances as established on record through the
evidences produced from the side of the claimants satisfy their case
regarding death of the deceased in an untoward incident and non-
recovery of journey ticket would not stand as an impediment for the
same. It is the contention of the claimants that the journey ticket has
been lost in course of occurrence. It is well settled that non-recovery
of journey ticket would not disprove the death of the deceased as a
bonafide passenger of the train. Therefore, the circumstances as stated
above coupled with evidence of A.W.2 establishes the death of the
deceased in the untoward incident while travelling in Hatia-Puri
Express.
9. Accordingly the claimants, who are the parents, wife and minor
son of the deceased, are found entitled for compensation as per
scheduled amount.
10. In the result the appeal is allowed and in terms of the principles
decided in the case of Union of india Vs- Rina Devi, (2019) 3 SCC
572, the Respondent - Union of India is directed to pay compensation
of Rs.8,00,000/- (eight lakhs) to the claimant - Appellants along with
interest @ 6% per annum from the date of accident, within a period of
four months from today. The entire compensation amount including
interest shall be disbursed in favour of all the Appellants by keeping
50% of the shares fall due to each Appellants, except Appellant No.4,
in fixed deposit in their names in any Nationalized bank for a period
of five years and the total amount fall due to the share of minor
Appellant No.4 (Birat Kumar Bhutia) shall be kept in fixed deposit in
any Nationalized Bank till he attains majority or for a period of five
years, whichever is later.
11. The copies of evidences and other documents as produced by
Ms. D. Mahapatra in course of hearing are kept on record.
12. An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
M.K.Panda
