Appeal filed at Lucknow Bench against a Railway Claims Tribunal Gorakhpur Bench judgment was recalled after admission because Section 23 requires appeals to be filed before the High Court with jurisdiction over the tribunal Bench's location, i.e., Allahabad. Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:14636
Court No. - 4
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 170 of 2024 Appellant :- Rinki Dubey Respondent :- Union Of India Thru. General Manager, Northern Railway New Delhi Counsel for Appellant :- Manish Kumar Srivastava,Chandra Prakash Singh,Saroj Kumari Counsel for Respondent :- Mahendra Kumar Misra
Hon'ble Rajnish Kumar,J.
I.A. No. 3 of 2025
2
accident had occurred in District Ayodhya, which is in the jurisdiction of this Court, cannot be a ground to entertain this appeal because the jurisdiction of Ayodhya is before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Gorakhpur Bench, Gorakhpur and jurisdiction of Gorakhpur is at Allahabad. Thus, inadvertently it has been admitted. Therefore, the submission is that the aforesaid order may be recalled and the appeal may be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
" 3. Territorial jurisdiction of Benches.
(1) The number of Benches, the Headquarter of and the territorial jurisdiction of a Bench shall be as specified in Schedule I and Schedule I(A).
(2) If an application is received by a Bench which does not have territorial jurisdiction to deal with the matter, the Registrar of the Bench shall return the application to the applicant.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (2) the applicant may apply to the Chairman and the Chairman may
3
thereupon for reasons to be recorded in writing direct a Bench other than the Bench before which an application has been filed to hear such application and issue such orders as may be necessary for the transfer of the application."
"23. Appeals .-(1) Same as provided in sub-section (2) and notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), or in any other law, an appeal shall lie from every order, not being an interlocutory order, of the Claims Tribunal, to the High Court having jurisdiction over the place where the Bench is located.
(2)No appeal shall lie from an order passed by the Claims Tribunal with the consent of the parties.
(3)Every appeal under this section shall be preferred within a period of ninety days from the date of the order appealed against."
4
filed at Allahabad in view of the aforesaid statutory provision.
"38. To sum up. Our conclusions are as follows. First there is no permanent seat of the High Court at Allahabad. The seats at Allahabad and at Lucknow may be changed in accordance with the provisions of the order. Second, the Chief Justice of the High Court has no power to increase or decrease the areas in oudh from time to time. The areas in oudh have been determined once by the Chief Justice and, therefore, there is no scope for changing the areas. Third. the Chief Justice has power under the second proviso to paragraph 14 of the order to direct in his discretion that any case or class of cases arising in oudh areas shall be heard at Allahabad. Any case or class of cases are those which are instituted at Lucknow. The interpretation given by the High Court that the word "heard" confers powers on the Chief Justice to order that any case or class of cases arising in oudh areas shall be instituted or filed at Allahabad, instead of Lucknow is wrong. The word "heard" means that cases which have already been instituted or filed at Lucknow may in the discretion of the Chief Justice under the second proviso to paragraph 14 of the order he directed to be heard at Allahabad. Fourth, the expression "cause of action" with regard to a civil matter means that it should be left to the litigant to institute cases at Lucknow Bench or at Allahabad Bench according to the cause of action arising wholly or in part within either of the areas. If the cause of action arises wholly within oudh areas then the Lucknow Bench will have jurisdiction. Similarly, if the cause of action arises wholly outside the specified areas in oudh then Allahabad will have jurisdiction. If the cause of action in part
5
arises in the specified oudh areas and part of the cause of action arises outside the specified areas, it will be open to the litigant to frame the case appropriately to attract the jurisdiction either at Lucknow or at Allahabad. Fifth, a criminal case arises where the offence has been committed or otherwise as provided in the Criminal Procedure Code. That will attract the jurisdiction of the Court at Allahabad or Lucknow. In some cases depending on the facts and the provision regarding jurisdiction, it may arise in either place."
On Appeal
6
learned counsel for the appellant to take appropriate steps, he continued to argue on application and insisted to decide the aforesaid application, therefore after hearing learned counsel for the parties, the application has been decided. Even otherwise, in view of the aforesaid statutory provision the appeal can be filed at Allahabad.
Order Date :- 3.3.2025/Raj
Digitally signed by :- RAJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act against the Gorakhpur Bench decision can validly be entertained at Lucknow Bench given accident location in Ayodhya.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sri Nasiruddin vs. State Transport Appellate TribunalRelied on¶10
(1975) 2 SCC 671 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Rinki Dubey
Union Of India Thru. General Manager, Northern Railway New Delhi
Rajnish Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
12 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
