Telangana High Court
R.Shiva Kumar vs Union Of India on 21 September, 2022
Bench: Sambasivarao Naidu
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.528 OF 2018
JUDGMENT:
Aggrieved by the Order dated 11-10-2017 in O.A (II) (U)
No.103 of 2011 passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal,
Secunderabad Bench, the applicant in the said OA preferred this
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
2. According to the grounds urged by the appellant in
the present appeal, the main grievance of the applicant 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.103
of 2011 has been filed by the applicant herein for compensation
on account of sustaining injuries in an untoward incident.
4. The said petition was filed with an allegation that the
appellant with a view to go to Bangalore to attend coolie work,
SSRN,J
went to Kurnool Town railway station, in the night of
03-04-2010, purchased a 2nd class train journey ticket bearing
No.37292094 from Kurnool to Bangalore and boarded Train
No.2785 Kachiguda - Bangalore, while traveling, the applicant
due to heavy rush of passengers, accidentally slipped and fell
down from the running train in between Gooty - Ramarajupally
railway station near Chiruthanda Village at about 1.30 hrs., and
he sustained severe head injury along with other multiple
injuries all over the body due to speed, jolts and sudden jerks of
train.
5. The respondent opposed the claim and filed written
statement denying the material averments of the petition and
put the applicant to strict proof of his 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 11-10-2017 the application of the appellant
herein was dismissed in view of the non-prosecution of the case.
7. It appears from the record that a memo was filed by
the learned counsel for the applicant to refer the matter to
Lokadalath and the same memo was filed without any consent of
SSRN,J
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
applicant was dismissed vide separate Order.
8. The appellant has filed the present Civil
Miscellaneous Appeal against the said Order and the learned
counsel for the applicant has submitted that no proper
opportunity was given to the appellant herein to submit his case
before the Tribunal. Learned counsel has further submitted that
the appellant 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
SSRN,J
adjournments, the appellant herein did not choose to produce
any evidence.
10. Learned counsel representing the respondent 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 appellant failed to adduce
evidence inspite of number of adjournments but the application
cannot be decided without giving any opportunity. The appellant
is entitled to fair chance of producing evidence and proving his
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 allowed by remanding the matter to the
Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, and in O.A (II)
(U) No.103 of 2011 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
SSRN,J
Tribunal shall dispose of the OA within 6 (Six) months from the
date of receipt of records.
As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall
stand closed. No costs.
_____________________
SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU, J
Date: 21-09-2022
PLV
SSRN,J
SSRN,J
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.152 OF 2021
Dated: 05-Jul-2022
KHRM
