Appeal dismissed for non-prosecution as respondents failed to appear while the High Court upheld the Tribunal's disposal of a railway compensation claim based on an affidavit from parents.
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 JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Appeal No.530 of 2015
======================================================
Union Of India Through The General Manager Eastern Railway Kolkata
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : None For the Respondent/s : None ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 07-12-2022
No one appears on call on behalf of the appellant-Railways. On 23.11.2022 also, no one had appeared on call.
Patna High Court MA No.530 of 2015 dt.07-12-2022 2/6
appeal is/are as follows:-
(i) whether he was moving on the said Train No. 13241 (UP), BankaRajendra Nagar Terminal Express from Jamalpur to Kiul and was having a valid ticket ?;
(ii) whether he died after falling from the train?;
(iii) whether the parents are entitled for the relief as sought for or not.
Patna High Court MA No.530 of 2015 dt.07-12-2022
3/6
documents/exhibits which included:-
(i) the Memo No. 12.02.2013 issued by the Station Master, Jamalpur to the officer in-charge GRP/Jamalpur (Ext. 1);
(ii) the application of the parent, Yogendra Mandal to the officer in-charge, Railway Police, Jamalpur stating therein that his son had died near Fulka halt after felling from the train (Ext. 2);
(iii) the Inquest Report dated 12.02.2013 (Ext. 3);
(iv) the First Information Report lodged by Railway Police, Jamalpur (Ext. 4) ;
(v) the post-mortem Report dated 13.02.2013 (Ext.5)
(vi) the Final Report submitted by the police in U.D Case No. 3/2013 (Ext. 6);
(vii) the Voter I.D Card of the deceased (Ext. 7);
(viii) the Voter I.D Card of the applicant-parent, Yogendra Mandal ( Ext. 8).
submitted the following documents:-
Ext. R1, the Enquiry Report according to which, the death was due to the
Patna High Court MA No.530 of 2015 dt.07-12-2022 4/6
negligence of the deceased with further narration that he was not a valid passenger and there was no ticket with him.
to the fact that he was moving on a valid ticket which may have lost due to the accident.
Patna High Court MA No.530 of 2015 dt.07-12-2022
5/6
17.4 We thus hold that mere presence of a body on the Railway premises will not be conclusive to hold that injured or deceased was a bona fide passenger for which claim for compensation could be maintained. However, mere absence of ticket with such injured or deceased will not negative the claim that he was a bona fide passenger. Initial burden will be on the claimant which can be discharged by filing an affidavit of the relevant facts and burden will then shift on the Railways and the issue can be decided on the facts shown or the attending circumstances. This will have to be dealt with from case to case on the basis of facts found. The legal position in this regard will stand explained accordingly.
Patna High Court MA No.530 of 2015 dt.07-12-2022 6/6
in passing the order dated 14.08.2015.
behalf of the Railways, the appeal is dismissed for nonprosecution.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Jagdish/neha/-
| AFR/NAFR | AFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | NA |
| Uploading Date | 09.12.2022 |
| Transmission Date |
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Union Of India Vs. Reena DeviExplained¶16
AIR 2018 SCC 2632 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Union Of India Through The General Manager Eastern Railway Kolkata
Sri Yogendra Mandal
Smt Malti Devi
Rajiv Roy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
