UNION OF INDIA Vs. KARUPPASAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order dated 20.06.2008 passed in O.A.No.66 of 2006 is under challenge in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

(2.) The Southern Railway is the appellant. The appeal is filed mainly on the ground that the respondent/claimant is not a bonafide passenger. However, perusal of the documents reveals that the respondent/claimant filed an application seeking compensation on the ground that on 16.07.2003 at about 14.40 hrs, the deceased boarded an EMU that went towards Beach Railway Station and accidentally fallen down and sustained injuries on the back side of his head. He was carried in the same EMU to Chennai Park Railway Station from where he was carried stretcher bearers and the friends of the deceased Mr.Mahesh and Mr.Thangaraj with Memo No.99/2003 issued by the Station Master, Park Railway Station and admitted into the casualty ward of Government General Hospital on that day at about 15.15 hrs, where the duty doctor examined and declared him dead and entered in the Accident Register that the deceased was brought dead.

(3.) The Claim application was filed. The appellant/Railway disputed the application on the ground that the deceased was not a bonafide passenger. The Tribunal adjudicated the issues with reference to the documents as well as the evidences available. Regarding Issue No.1, the findings of the Tribunal reveals that three journey tickets which the deceased had purchased on 16.07.2003 for self and two of his friends at about 2.30 p.m and kept in the shirt pocket of the deceased appears to have been lost in transit. This fact was reiterated ni the affidavit filed by A.W.2. There was not much rebuttal by the respondent on the pleadings at column No.7 of the application as well as the evidence of A.W.2. Based on the said evidence, the Tribunal arrived a conclusion that the deceased could be treated as bonafide passenger and further, the other issues regarding legal heirs are also confirmed in favour of the claimants and accordingly, the compensation was granted. The accident was established and further, based on the available document, the Railway Tribunal could able to arrive a conclusion that the deceased was a bonafide passenger. The sequences narrated also reveals that the untoward incident occurred in a moving train.