UNION OF INDIA Vs. NALINI PARIDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal under section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as "the act") filed by the Union of India represented through the General Manager, East Coast railway, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar, challenging the award dated 26-9-2005 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, bhubaneswar Bench in O. A. No. 70 of 2004 whereby it awarded a sum of Rs. 4 lakhs to the claimant-respondent with an interest of 3% from the date of filing of the application, failing which the interest will be payable @ of 5%.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are as follows : the claimant-respondent filed O. A. No. 70 of 2004 before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar Bench claiming compensation from the appellant on the ground that on 29-1-2003, the claimant after visiting her cousin sister's house returned from khurda Road by Train No. 212 DN Puri-Sambalpur Passenger. The husband of her cousin sister came to Khurda Railway Station with the claimant and purchased a second class passenger ticket for the claimant. Thereafter she boarded a second class compartment. When the train was passing the south cabin of the Bhubaneswar Railway station, the claimant came to the exit door of the coach to see her husband who was earlier informed to come to the station to receive her. While she was looking for her husband to give indication about her position, she fell down accidentally due to sudden jerk and imbalance as a result of which she came under the wheels of the train and her both legs below the knee were severed at the spot. After the incident, some public who had witnessed the incident raised a hue and cry. Her husband, who was waiting at the end of the platform towards south side, immediately went to the spot and carried the injured to the nearest hospital with the help of public, who were present at the spot. Accordingly, she was shifted to the Capital hospital, Unit-VI, Bhubaneswar and the doctors amputated both her legs at the knee of ankle joints and her ticket was lost at the time of the accident. Due to the said accident as she lost her both legs, after her release from the hospital she filed the claim application before the Railway Claims Tribunal.

(3.) RECEIVING notice from the Tribunal the appellant-Railway Authorities filed their written statement denying that the incident as alleged by the claimant had not taken place at Bhubaneswar Railway Station on 29-1-2003. The claimant was not a passenger in Train No. 212 DN Puri-Sambalpur passenger and she was not injured in the train accident at the railway station because the accident did not come to the notice of either Guard/driver of the train or the Station employees and no information in connection with the alleged incident was available either with the working guard and driver or with the on-duty Station Master, bhubaneswar nor was it within the knowledge of or reported before the Railway Police or R. P. F. Personnel at the Bhubaneswar railway Station. The documents attached to the claim application were no way connected to prove the untoward incident to have taken place at the Bhubaneswar Railway Station premises. Therefore, the claimant is not entitled to any compensation under the provision of the Act and they have stated that the application was filed on 28-9-2004, more than one year seven months and twenty nine days after the alleged untoward incident and in any case, about eight months after the limitation period of one year prescribed under Section 16 of the Act had set in, for which no sufficient cause had been shown by the claimant for condonation of each day's delay after 28-1-2004, the last date by which the claim became so barred. Under such facts and circumstances mentioned above, the appellant before the Tribunal asserted that the claim application was devoid of any merit and liable to be dismissed.