The Court condoned a 30-day delay in filing a first appeal under the Railway Claims Tribunal Act. It dismissed the appeal, holding the deceased from the lower court perused. The other items with the deceased. The Court dismissed the appeal.
The appeal is dismissed and the order of the Railway Claims Tribunal is upheld.
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.
*** IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI**
% 29th May, 2017 SUDAMA DEVI & ANR. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. N.K.Gupta, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Jagjit Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Preet Singh, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA
To be referred to the Reporter or not?
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)
CM No. 8647/2017 (delay of 30 days in filing the appeal)
For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 30 days in
filing the appeal is condoned.
CM stands disposed of.
FAO No. 112/2017
by the appellants/applicants.
FAO No. 112/2017 Page 1 of 5
FAO No. 112/2017 Page 2 of 5
it is not necessary that in every case a train ticket must be recovered before it is held that the deceased was a bonafide passenger, however,
every case depends upon the facts of each case as to whether or not it
should be held in favour of the deceased that he had purchased a
FAO No. 112/2017 Page 3 of 5
railway ticket. In the present case, there is no evidence of any eye witnesses of the deceased having purchased a train ticket and it is also seen that various articles were recovered from the person of the deceased, but no train ticket was recovered. Also, I do not find it illogical for the Railway Claims Tribunal to observe that if the deceased was a regular passenger then he ought to have a monthly pass and hence there would be no question of purchasing a daily train ticket. Though learned counsel for the appellants argued that the deceased did not regularly travel by train, however not only there is anything to substantiate this aspect, the fact of the matter is also that if deceased used to undertake train journey then there is no reason why for the train journeys regularly undertaken for going to his office/official work a monthly pass which is most convenient as also cheap was not purchased.
FAO No. 112/2017 Page 4 of 5
the deceased as also from the articles found with the deceased at the
time of recovery of the body.
6. Dismissed.
MAY 29, 2017/ ib
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J
FAO No. 112/2017 Page 5 of 5
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay of 30 days in filing the first appeal should be condoned.
Whether the deceased was a bonafide passenger of the train.
Whether the Railway Claims Tribunal acted legally in dismissing the claim due to lack of recovered ticket.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sudama Devi & Anr.
Union of India
Valmiki J. Mehta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
