GANGAJAL DEVI Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as "RCT Act") has been preferred against the order dated 27.11.2012 passed in Claim Application No. OA 00254 of 2002 by Sri J.D. Goswami, learned Member (Technical) of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna (hereinafter referred to as "Claims Tribunal"). By the said order, the learned Claims Tribunal has rejected the claim application filed on behalf of claimant/appellant under Section 125 of the Railways Act, 1989 read with Section 16 of the RCT Act. Short fact of the case is that on 30.9.2002, an application under Section 16 of the RCT Act was filed by the claimant/appellant disclosing therein that on 4.6.2002, she alongwith her deceased husband namely Ramashish Yadav and other villagers were going to Nawada from Sadishopur. After purchasing valid railway tickets, they boarded the train, bearing No. 562 Dn. at Sadishopur, however; due to heavy rush inside the compartment, the husband of the claimant fell down from the running train and died on the spot itself. The matter was reported to the police and accordingly, a U.D. Case No. 3 of 2002 was registered by Rail Police Station, Danapur. During investigation, it was found that the death had occurred in an untowards incident. Accordingly, the claimant/appellant claimed total compensation amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- (four lacs). It was further indicated in the application that evidences/witnesses will be produced at the time of hearing of the said case. Since the claim application was filed within time, same was registered on 30.9.2002 itself as OA 00254 of 2002 and notices were directed to be issued. Before the learned Claims Tribunal, the respondent/Union of India through the Eastern Railway, Kolkata filed a written statement through the Senior Commercial Manager/Court, Eastern Railway, Kolkata. In the written statement, the respondent/Railway claimed that the alleged incident was not an untowards incident in terms of Section 123 of the Railways Act, 1989 and denied the fact that deceased accidentally fell down from Train No. 562 Dn. at Sadishopur Railway Station on 4.6.2002. It has also been claimed that neither ticket was produced nor was seized by the G.R.P. during the investigation. In sum and substances, the case of claimant was denied by the respondent/Railway through its written statement. Save and except written statement, no other material was brought on record on behalf of respondent/Railway to demolish the case of the claimant. The learned Claims Tribunal, after hearing the parties, had framed issues, which are as follows:--

(2.) The learned Tribunal also noticed that the claimant had produced certain evidences/documents, which were marked in the following manner:--

(3.) The learned Claims Tribunal, after hearing the parties, proposed to decide Issue No. 1 as first issue and decided the said issue in following terms:--