RAM AVTAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge by means of this First Appeal under Sec. 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 is to the impugned judgment dated 23.12.2010 of the Railway Claims Tribunal whereby the Claim Petition of the appellant was dismissed.

(2.) Briefly the case set up by the Appellant is that on 21.03.2010, the deceased Mr. Dinesh was travelling by train No. 8D from Palam Railway Station to Sarai Rohilla Railway Station and there was huge rush in the compartment due to Navratra Mela and when he boarded the train he got enough standing space but when the train reached at near Choona Mandi Kirti Nagar Railway Station all of a sudden the train jerked violently and due to this jerk Mr.Dinesh fell down from the train and died. The appellant who claims to be the dependent of the deceased filed a claim petition under Sec. 16 of the Railways Claims Tribunal Act which was dismissed vide order dated 23.12.2010 and feeling aggrieved with the same, the appellant has filed the present appeal.

(3.) Arguing for the appellant, Mr. S.N. Parashar, learned counsel submits that Shri Dinesh Kumar was a bona fide passenger in the said train and he had gone to meet his uncle, Shri Prahlad, who is a resident of Palam. Learned counsel further submits that the deceased, Shri Dinesh Kumar had boarded the said train from Palam and his uncle Shri Prahlad himself came to see him off at the railway station. Learned counsel also submits that even Shri Prahlad had, in fact, purchased the railway ticket for Shri Dinesh Kumar, but, unfortunately when Shri Dinesh Kumar had reached near Kirti Nagar Railway Station, he had fallen down from the train due to heavy rush in the train because of Navratra festival. Learned counsel further submits that through evidence on record of Shri Prahlad Kumar, the appellant had proved on record that Shri Dinesh Kumar was a bona fide passenger in the said train and so far as the nature of the accident was concerned, the same was proved through the police records and the postmortem report. Learned counsel also submits that the deceased, Shri Dinesh Kumar was a resident of Paharganj and he had gone to meet his uncle, Shri Prahlad at Palam and his accident at Chuna Mandi, Kirti Nagar would clearly prove the fact that his travelling from Palam to Sarai Rohilla and on his way having met with the said accident. Learned counsel also submits that the learned Railway Claims Tribunal has committed an illegality in disbelieving the said witness who proved on record the boarding of the train by the deceased on the evening of the said fateful day.