DEEP NARAYAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge by means of this first appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, is to the impugned judgment dated 3.2.2010 of the Railway Claims Tribunal, and by which judgment, the Railway Claims Tribunal dismissed the claim petition of the appellant who claimed to have been injured on account of a fall from a train near Badli on 17.11.2008.

(2.) The case of the appellant/claimant in the claim petition filed before the Railway Claims Tribunal was that he had purchased a second class general ticket for travelling from Adarsh Nagar to Holambi Kalan, Delhi. This is mentioned in paras 7 and 7A of the Claim Petition. In para 11 of the Claim Petition, it is said that the train ticket was lost as the hand bag containing journey ticket was lost. The case which was set up in the claim petition was that the appellant on 17.11.2008 was travelling from Adarsh Nagar to Holambi Kalan and since the train was over crowded and it took strong jerk/jolt, he fell down from the moving train and suffered injuries. It was then alleged that the right leg of the appellant came in the wheel of the train and which had to be amputated. It was further the case of the appellant that he became unconscious and was lying near the track for the whole night and in the morning he was taken to hospital when he was discovered lying near the track by a railway employee.

(3.) As contrasted to the case set up in the claim petition of not travelling with anyone and of having purchased a second class general ticket which got lost, in the affidavit by way of evidence the case however was laid out that actually the appellant was travelling with two of his friends namely Shri Suresh and Shri Sanjay and the computerized joint train ticket for a total of three persons was purchased by the friend Shri Suresh who had the same. While climbing the train, the appellant was separated from two of his friends who had to climb another compartment due to the rush of passengers and at the end of the journey his friend threw away the ticket and without waiting for him the friends left the station for their homes. In the affidavit, by way of evidence the appellant did not mention that he had become unconscious and in fact laid out a case that he remained lying on the spot for the whole night as the place of the accident was a lonely place. The Railway Claims Tribunal dismissed the claim petition pointing out to the various inconsistencies in the pleadings and the evidence on behalf of the appellant and which inconsistencies were serious contradictions. Some of the relevant observations as given by the Railway Claims Tribunal read as under: