Orissa High Court
Manju Raul& Ors vs Union Of India on 17 June, 2025
Author: S.K. Panigrahi
Bench: S.K. Panigrahi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
FAO No.231 of 2025
Manju Raul& Ors. .... Appellant(s)
Mr. Karunakar Das, Adv.
-versus-
Union of India .... Respondent(s)
Mr. Milan Kumar, CGC
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI
ORDER
Order 17.06.2025
No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. The present appeal at the instance of the claimants/
appellants is directed against the judgment/order dated
16.04.2025 passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal,
Bhubaneswar Bench, Bhubaneswar in Case
No.OA(IIU)/133/2024.
3. Heard.
4. The brief fact of the case is that the appellants are being the
L.Rs of Late Dinabandhu Raul filed the original claim
application vide OA (IIU) No. 133 of 2024 before the learned
Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar Bench,
Bhubaneswar stating therein that on 16.08.2022, the
Deceased along with one co-villager came to Chennai and
joined one GSP Construction Company as labourers. It is
further averred that on 20.08.2022 the deceased went to
Chennai Central Railway Station, purchased one general
ticket to travel to Berhampur Railway Station and boarded
some unknown, train and during journey the owner of the
company called back him due to some urgent work.
Immediately, he got down from the said train at Ongole
railway station and had purchased one general ticket and
boarded in Train No.22612 (Jaipaigudi-Chennai express) in
order to go Chennai railway station. During journey on
21.08.2022, due to sudden jerk of the said train, he
accidentally fell down from the running train at KM
No.246/23-25, UP line track in between Ulavapadu-Tettu
railway station and sustained injuries. On being noticed by
the on duty Key man, he immediately rushed to the spot and
shifted the injured to nearest hospital by 108 Ambulance,
Where the doctor declared him dead. With regard to the
ticket, it is averred by the Applicants that on the date of
incident, the deceased was travelling with a valid journey
ticket but the same was lost in the alleged incident.
5. Learned counsel for the Appellants submits that the
learned Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.8,00,000/-
(Rupees Eight Lakh Only) along with interest @ 9% per
annum in favour of the Appellants. However, the Appellant
No.1 was permitted to withdraw only 10% of the awarded
amount. He further submits that since the Appellant No.1 is
going through financial hardships, she may be permitted to
withdraw the entire awarded compensation amount.
6. In such view of the matter, this Court modifies only that
part of the judgment dated 16.04.2025 passed by the learned
Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar Bench,
Bhubaneswar in Case No.OA(IIU)/133/2024 and directs that
the Appellant No.1 will be permitted to withdraw 50% of her
share as awarded in the judgment dated 16.04.2025.
7. This FAO is, accordingly, disposed of.
(Dr. S.K. Panigrahi)
Sumitra Judge
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
