LAWS(ALL)-1994-1-19

KUMARI SAVITRI ROY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On January 06, 1994
KUMARI SAVITRI ROY Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order D/ - 27-8-1979 passed in Claims Case No. 66 of 1977 Km. Savitri Roy v. Railways Administration by Ad hoc Claims Commissioner (Rlys), Allahabad, dismissing the claim for compensation of Km. Savitri Roy.

(2.) According to the admitted facts of the case, a collision took place between 103 UP Deluxe Express train and G.P.C. Special at Naini Railway Station on 10-10-77 at 0015 hours as a result of which S/ Sri R.N. Roy and Nand Kumar were admittedly killed while S/Sri H.N. Bajpai, Sukhdeo Prasad and Madan Gopal admittedly sustained injuries. It is also admitted case of the parties that late Sri R.N. Roy, who was T.T.E. was on duty at the relevant time on 103 UP Deluxe Express Train which was involved in the accident. Kumari Savitri Roy (Since deceased) filed petition claiming herself to be unmarried sister and heir of late Sri R.N. Roy for grant of compensation u/S. 82A of the Indian Railways Act for the loss occasioned by his death. The Railway Administration filed written statement and resisted claim only on the ground that late R.N. Roy being a crew in 103 UP Deluxe Express Train on 10-10-77 to perform his duty was not a bona fide passenger and consequently the application was not maintainable under Section 82A of the Indian Railway Act. The Claims Commissioner came to the conclusion that late R.N. Roy was member of the crew and was not passenger in 103 UP Deluxe Express Train and consequently the application u/S. 82 A of the Indian Railways Act was not maintainable. In the result the application of Km. Savitri Roy was dismissed by a consolidated judgment dated 27-3-1979. Aggrieved by the said judgment and order Kumari Savitry Roy (since deceased) has filed this appeal u/S.82F(2) of the Indian Railways Act. Kumari Savitri Roy died during the pendency of the appeal and Hardhan Banerji, in place of Savitri Roy, has been impleaded as appellant.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.