SATYADEO SINGH Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") has been preferred against judgment and order dated 14.2.2013 passed by Sri J.D. Goswami, Member (Technical), Railway Claims Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal"). By the said judgment and order, the learned Tribunal has dismissed the Claim Application No. OA 00354 of 2002. Short fact of the case is that on 31.10.2002, a claim application under Section 16 of the Act was filed on behalf of appellant in the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/- (four lacs) on the ground that in an untoward incident, which had taken place on 10.8.2002, one Narpat Singh, father of the appellant died. In the claim application, it was disclosed firstly that on 10.8.2002, the deceased was going home from Danapur. After purchasing a valid railway ticket, the deceased boarded a train i.e. 519 Up Patna Ara Passenger at Danapur Railway Station. After getting into the train, the train started, but due to heavy rush inside the compartment, the deceased accidentally fell down from the running train near the western cabin of Danapur Railway Station. As a result of which, he died on spot. As per the claim application, the matter was reported to Rail Police, Danapur and accordingly, a U.D. Case No. 9 of 2002 was registered. The police after investigation found the factum of the accident true. It was claimed that deceased died in an untoward incident. Besides filing application under Section 16 of the Act, the appellant also filed an affidavit corroborating his case, which was filed on 27.8.2012. Before the Tribunal, the respondent/Railway also appeared and filed written statement refuting the claim. Before the Tribunal, to establish the case, only appellant was examined as a witness and besides his oral evidence, he brought on record copy of memo, which was addressed to G.R.P. by Station Master, Danapur i.e. Ext.-A-2, copy of application of the appellant addressed to the Officer Incharge, Railway Police Station, Danapur marked as Ext.-A-3, copy of F.I.R. of U.D. Case Ext.-A-4, copy of final report Ext.-A-5, copy of inquest report Ext.-A-6, copy of postmortem report Ext.-A-7, copy of Voter I-Card of Satyadeo Singh appellant Ext.-A-8 and copy of Voter l-Card of deceased Narpat Singh as Ext.-A-9.

(2.) The learned Tribunal in the case framed four issues and finally, he rejected the claim application by its judgment/order dated 14.2.2013, which has been assailed in the present appeal.

(3.) Sri A.N. Mishra, learned counsel, who was assisted by Sri Anant Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the learned Tribunal, without properly appreciating the evidence, in a mechanical manner, has rejected the claim application. He submits that before the Tribunal, evidences were brought on record to establish that the deceased, after purchasing a valid ticket, had boarded the train at Danapur Railway Station, however; due to heavy rush and jolt, he fell down near the western cabin of the Danapur Station and received multiple injuries and he succumbed. He submits that the deceased was a bona-fide passenger and it was an untoward incident. Learned counsel for the appellant has further emphasized that the Tribunal has incorrectly concluded that it was death due to run over, not due to fall from the running train. He further submits that the learned Tribunal on imaginary ground has concluded that it was a case of run over and deceased was not a bona fide passenger. He submits that the order of the Tribunal being mechanical is liable to be set aside and the appellant, whose father died in an untoward incident, is entitled to get compensation, as was claimed, before the Tribunal.