Telangana High Court
T. Kalpana vs Union Of India on 5 July, 2022
Bench: Sambasivarao Naidu
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.152 OF 2021
ORDER:
Aggrieved by the Order dated 13-09-2017 in O.A (II) (u)
No. 531 of 2012 passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal,
Secunderabad Bench, the applicants in the said OA preferred
this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
2. According to the grounds urged by the appellants
in the present appeal, the main grievance of the applicants is
that the Tribunal below adopted very narrow minded
approach, in spite of the fact that the Act is beneficial piece of
legislation. Thereby they sought for setting aside the Order and
sought for an opportunity.
3. According to the Judgment filed along with the
appeal and as per other record, it shows that O.A (II) (u) No.
531 of 2012 has been filed by the applicants herein for
compensation on account of death of daughter of the applicant
No.1 and mother of the applicant No.2.
4. The said petition was filed with an allegation that
the deceased with a view to go to Vijayawada to visit Kanaka
Durga Temple and to see her maternal uncle went to Tuni
Railway Station, in the afternoon of 26.10.2012 she purchased a
II-Class Superfast Train Journey Ticket bearing No.49583272
from Tuni to Vijayawada and boarded Train No.12717
Ratnachal Express which was plying from Visakhapatnam -
Vijayawada, while travelling the deceased accidentally slipped
and fell down from the running train between Gannavaram and
Mustabad Railway Stations near Purushothampatnam and she
sustained head injury and died due to speed, jolt and sudden
jerks of train. She was shifted to Help Hospitals, Vijayawada in
Ambulance and she died while undergoing treatment on 01-11-
2012.
5. The respondent opposed the claim and filed written
statement denying the material averments of the petition and
put the applicants to strict proof of their case.
6. On the basis of the rival contentions, issues have
been framed and matter was adjourned from time to time, for
trial. However, on 13-09-2012 the application of the applicants
herein was dismissed in view of the non-prosecution of the
case.
7. It appears from the record that the memo was filed
by the learned counsel for the applicants to refer the matter to
Lokadalath and the same memo was filed without any consent
of the respondent. Therefore, the memo was not accepted and
in view of the circular from the Registrar, Railway Claims
Tribunal, New Delhi vide Circular No.RCT/DLI/
Secunderabad/96 dated 26.12.2005 and in view of Section 15 of
the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 and also basing on
Judgment of High Court of Karnataka in W.P.No.36935 of
20001, the application of the applicants was dismissed vide
separate Order.
8. Applicants have filed the present Civil
Miscellaneous Appeal against the said Order and the learned
counsel for the applicants has submitted that no proper
opportunity was given to the applicants herein to submit their
case before the Tribunal. Learned counsel has further
submitted that the applicants and other persons who filed
similar applications filed a memo before the Tribunal with a
request to refer the matter before Lokadalath and it was
bonafide request and therefore sought for an opportunity to
contest their claim.
9. As could be seen from the Order challenged in the
present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, it shows that though the
matter was adjourned from time to time for number of
AIR 2001 Karnataka 504
adjournments, the applicants herein did not choose to produce
any evidence.
10. Learned counsel representing the respondents
herein submitted that there are no bonafides in the Civil
Miscellaneous Appeal and that the application itself is a fake
claim and the same is liable to be dismissed.
11. It may be true that the applicants failed to adduce
evidence inspite of number of adjournments but the application
cannot be decided without giving any opportunity. The
applicants are entitled to fair chance of producing evidence and
proving their claim. Therefore, it is a fit case for remanding the
matter to the Tribunal below, with a specific direction to
dispose the same on merits by giving opportunity to both
parties.
12. In view of the above discussion, this Civil
Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of by remanding the matter
to the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, and in
O.A (II) (u) No. 531 of 2012 is restored. The Railway Claims
Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench is directed to dispose of the
above OA by giving reasonable opportunity to both parties, for
adducing evidence and submitting their respective arguments.
The Tribunal shall dispose of the OA within 6 (Six) months
from the date of receipt of records.
13. With the above directions, this Civil Miscellaneous
Appeal is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall
stand closed.
______________________________
SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU, J
Date: 05-Jul-2022
KHRM
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.152 OF 2021
Dated: 05-Jul-2022
KHRM
