Azeem Afsar Khan vs Union Of India
2022 Latest Caselaw 2564 Tel

HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY

     CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.1212 of 2017

JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal is filed by the applicant/injured, against the

orders passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad

Bench in O.A. II (U) No.181 of 2010, dated 26.04.2016.

2. The appellant herein has filed an application claiming

compensation of Rs.8 Lakhs from the respondent-Railways on

account of the injury sustained by him in an untoward incident

alleged to have been occurred on 30.04.2010, which was dismissed

by the Railway Claims Tribunal.

3. Heard both sides and perused the record

4. It is urged by the learned counsel for appellant that the

Railway Claims Tribunal has not properly appreciated the evidence

of the applicant and only relying on the evidence of RW-1, rejected

the claim of applicant for compensation on the ground that the

applicant/appellant fell down while trying to catch up a running

train, which is not even part of the pleadings of the Railways. It is

further urged that RW-1 is not the eyewitness to the incident

GAC, J CMA.No.1212 of 2017

though he was present as a Guard of the train. It is further urged

by the counsel for appellant that the Railway Tribunal has erred in

observing that the friends of the appellant were not examined and

therefore, the evidence of appellant cannot be believed.

5. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel appearing

for the Railways contended that the original journey ticket was not

produced by the appellant and therefore, the contention of the

appellant that he purchased the ticket, cannot be believed. It is

further contended that the evidence of RW-1 clearly reveals that

the untoward incident had occurred due to the appellant trying to

catch a running train, as such, it can be termed as "self-inflected

injury" and therefore, the respondent-Railways need not pay any

compensation. Accordingly, he prayed to dismiss the appeal.

6. On perusal of the record, it is evident that the application for

compensation was filed by the appellant/injured alleging that on

30.04.2010, he along with his friends Jafar and Balu went to

Umdanagar Railway Station, purchased a single computer journey

ticket bearing No.80292306 to Jamai Osmania and boarded the

GAC, J CMA.No.1212 of 2017

train. It is further contended in the application by the appellant that

he stood near the door as he could not get the seat since the bogie

was loaded with vegetable baskets and vendors and due to sudden

jolts, he accidentally slipped and fell down at Dabirpura railway

station, the wheels of the bogie ran over his right leg causing

traumatic amputation, for which, he was shifted to Osmania

General hospital in 108 ambulance, where, he was treated. The

photocopy of the journey ticket of the three persons was filed

before the Railway Claims Tribunal, but it could not be marked.

7. The written statement as well as the DRM report disputes the

claim of the appellant for compensation. The specific plea raised

by the Railways is that the applicant was not the bonafide

passenger and that the injuries caused were not on account of any

untoward incident. But, contrary to the said contentions, the

written statement also disclose that as per the version of the

Booking Supervisor of Dabirpura Railway Station, the Home

Guard, who was on duty, informed that one boy aged 17 years, had

fallen down from Passenger Train No.526 at 17.30 hours on

Platform No.1 and his right leg was cut and the injured was alive.

GAC, J CMA.No.1212 of 2017

8. Basing on the aforesaid pleadings, the Railway Claims

Tribunal has framed the following issues :

"1.Whether the applicant was a bona fide passenger of train in question on the said train ?

2. Whether the applicant sustained injuries as a result of an untoward incident ?

3. Whether the applicant is entitled to claim compensation as prayed for ?

4. To what relief ?"

9. On behalf of the applicant, AWs.1 to 3 were examined and

Exs.A-1 to A-4 were marked. AW-1 is the applicant/injured,

AW-2 is Dr.G.Rama Krishna Reddy, who treated the injured and

AW-3 is the Booking Clerk of the Railway Department. On behalf

of the Railways, the Railway Guard was examined as RW-1 and

Exs.R-1 and R-2 were marked.

10. The Tribunal disbelieved the evidence of AWs.1 to 3 and by

believing the evidence of the Railway Guard i.e. RW-1 and by

relying on Ex.R-2/the Divisional Railway Manager's Report,

dismissed the claim application of the applicant by recording a

finding that the applicant was not a bonafide passenger of the

GAC, J CMA.No.1212 of 2017

Passenger Train bearing No.526 and the injuries sustained by the

appellant were self-inflicted injuries as he tried to catch the running

train. It is also the finding of the Railway Claims Tribunal that

there is no corroborative evidence to show/prove that the appellant

was a bonafide passenger, as none of his friends were examined

before it.

11. On perusal of the entire evidence and the documents filed by

the Railway Department, it is evident that the contents in the

written statement of the Railway Department clearly disclose that

the Booking Supervisor of Dabirpura Railway Station informed the

higher authorities that the Home Guard on duty informed him that

one boy aged about 17 years, had fallen from Passenger Train

No.526 at 17.30 hours on the platform and his right leg was cut and

he was alive. The evidence led by the Railway Department is

contrary to the recitals in the written statement. They have given a

go-bye to their pleadings and led the evidence of RW-1, who is the

Guard of the train. There is no evidence on record to show or

prove that the Railway Guard had witnessed the incident. The first

information to the GRP was from the Booking Supervisor, who

GAC, J CMA.No.1212 of 2017

came to know the information through the Railway Home Guard.

The record also reveals that the Railway Guard was not at all

examined by the GRP. Para 8 of the report of the Divisional

Railway Manager reads as under :

"On 30.04.2010 a message was issued by Smt.M.Mani, Booking Clerk/Dabirpura to GRP/SI/KCG and RPF/SI/KCG, informing that;

"As per on duty home guards information A boy aged around 17 to 20 yrs has fallen from train No.526 around 17.30 hrs at DQR/Stn on platform No.(1). His right leg was cut and was alive. Informed to 108 Van".

On the same day, i.e., 30.04.2010 at 22.15 hrs., a telephonic message was received to GRP/KCG from Osmania General Hospital. In this regard a Diary entry was made in Station House General Diary of GRP/KCG at Sl.No.28, stating that; "At this time received information from OGH that one person by name Azeem, S/o.Lateef Khan, aged 19 years, R/o.Warasiguda, Secunderabad, MLC No.13259 with IP.No.12899 who was fell down from train at 6.00 p.m.""

The aforesaid information clearly reveals that during the course of

investigation, these are the messages/first information given by the

Booking Clerk as well as by the authorities of Osmania General

GAC, J CMA.No.1212 of 2017

hospital. Even the name of the injured/appellant was also

mentioned in the investigation report. But, quite surprisingly, the

Divisional Railway Manager concludes in his report that the boy

was running from booking office side and while trying to catch the

running train, he fell down. As to how this finding came in the

Divisional Manager's Report, was not at all appreciated by the

Railway Claims Tribunal. Though the Xerox copy of the Railway

ticket was also filed before the Tribunal, the same was not at all

marked. On 30.04.2010, the statement of the Booking Clerk

Smt.M.Mani was also recorded, which clearly reveals that the

appellant fell down from the train and his right leg was cut and he

was alive and later they informed to 108 ambulance. The record

also reveals that the Booking Clerk/Smt.M.Mani had given a

statement on 26.12.2010 reiterating the same information which

was informed to her by the Home Guard on duty. The certificate

issued by one B.Sudarshan, AMJ/UR, dated 30.12.2010 also

disclose that the Daily Train Cash-cum-Summary Ticket

No.80292306 Ex Umdanagar to Jamai Osmania for 3 persons

Rs.12/- was issued at Umdanagar by Sri Raman Kumar,

GAC, J CMA.No.1212 of 2017

Commercial Clerk. The certificate corroborates the version of the

appellant that he, along with his two friends, travelled on the train

and the number on the photocopy of the Train Ticket corroborates

with the number which was incorporated in the above certificate.

Further, though the incident took place on 30.04.2010, the record

does not disclose any statement of RW-1 recorded on the said

date. Surprisingly on 05.11.2011, the statement of RW-1 was

recorded, which clearly disclose that he was the on duty Guard for

the Passenger Train No.526 on 30.04.2010 and that a boy, who was

about to board the running train, fell down. His evidence nowhere

discloses that he had witnessed the incident and it is not known as

to why the statement of RW-1 was not recorded on 30.04.2010 or

prior to 05.11.2011. His statement also discloses that he had given

message to the Deputy Superintendent, but there was no record

before the Tribunal to that effect. The evidence of RW-1 further

discloses that he has not mentioned in Ex.R-1/Guard's Rough

Journal regarding the availability of the ticket with the boy who fell

down from the train and did not ask the victim regarding his name

and he has not mentioned in Ex.R-1 about the ticket. The evidence

GAC, J CMA.No.1212 of 2017

of RW-1 clearly discloses that the victim had purchased the ticket

and they ran towards the train and later the boy fell down.

Therefore, in view of the evidence of RW-1 and the evidence of

AWs.1 and 3, it can be construed that the applicant was the

bonafide passenger, who purchased the ticket from AW-3 and

boarded the train and later fell down from the train. The evidence

of AW-2 further discloses that the right leg of the injured was

amputated on 04.05.2010 i.e. subsequent to the untoward incident

which took place on 30.04.2010 and Ex.A-4/Case sheet along with

the discharge summary disclose that AW-1/injured was admitted in

the hospital on 30.04.2010 and his right leg was amputated during

the course of treatment and he was discharged on 16.05.2010.

Therefore, the railways are liable to pay compensation.

12. Coming to the quantum of compensation, as per the oral

evidence of AW-2 i.e. the Doctor who treated the appellant, the

appellant's right leg was amputated from above the knee. In view

of the amputation suffered by the appellant, his case falls under

Clause (17) of the Schedule given by the Ministry of Railways vide

GAC, J CMA.No.1212 of 2017

Notification dated 22nd December, 2016, as per which, he is

entitled for compensation of Rs.6,40,000/-.

13. In the result, the appeal is allowed, setting aside the order

dated 26.04.2016, passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal,

Secunderabad Bench in O.A.II (U) No.181 of 2010 and granting

compensation of Rs.6,40,000/- to the appellant. The respondent/

Railways shall deposit the compensation amount within a period of

three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and

on such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the same

without furnishing any security. No order as to costs.

14. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

closed.

_________________________________ G.ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY, J

Date: 10.06.2022

ajr