LAWS(PAT)-1996-7-3

LALDEO SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On July 25, 1996
LALDEO SINGH Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals arise out of the orders of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Patna Branch in Claim Case Nos. 56, 57 and 58 of 1990, whereby and whereunder the applications filed under Section 82-A of the Indian Railways Act, 1890, by the appellant for claims have been rejected on the ground that he was not "dependent" to seek compensation of the deceased persons under Section 2 (1) (d) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.

(2.) It appears on 16-4-1990, while 383 Up Mokamch-Danapur Passenger, started from Gulzarbagh Railway Station, in Patna town, one of its compartments caught fire resulting in death of several persons including Smt. Malo Devi, Maniksh Kumar and Picka Kumar, wife and sons of the appellant Lal Deo Singh, due to burn injuries. The learned Tribunal has held that Malo Devi and her two sons were bona fide passengers of the ill-fated train and they died due to burn injuries. But the claim for compensation has been rejected merely on the ground that the appellant was not "dependent" of the deceased persons in terms of Section 2(1) (d) (iii) (a) of the Workmen's Compensation Act. That apart, it has also been held that Malo Devi was a'house wife, therefore, wholly dependent on her husband.

(3.) The only question arises for consideration is whether in view of the accident which took place on 16-4-1990, resulting in death of appellant's wife and sons, he would be entitled to claim compensation in terms of the provisions incorporated under Railways Act, 1989. Admittedly, the death of the wife and sons of the appellant had taken place on 16-4-1990. The Railways Act, 1989 enacted by the Parliament was published in the Gazette of India (Extraordinary) dated 5th June, 1989. As per Section 125 (1) (d), an application for compensation under Section 124 in case of death due to Railway accident can be made by any "dependent" of the deceased or where such a dependant is a minor, by his guardian. Sub-section (2) envisages that every application by a dependant for compensation under this Section shall be made for the benefit of every other dependant.