A civil miscellaneous appeal challenging the Railway Claims Tribunal's dismissal of a compensation claim for the death of a bona fide passenger. The High Court held the appeal untenable, dismissing it and confirming the Tribunal's order.
The appeal was dismissed confirming the order of the Tribunal without costs.
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, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
DATE.18-03-2011.
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.812 OF 2006
Between:
Pallapu Ankamma and two others. --- Appellants/ Applicants.
The Union of India, Rep. by its General Manager, South Central Railway, Railway Nilayam, Secunderabad. --Respondent/
Respondent.
The Court made the following:
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.812 OF 2006
JUDGEMENT:
1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (for short, “the RCT Act”) assailing order dated 05-06-2000, passed in O.A.A. No.1 of 2000, filed under Section 16 of the RCT Act, 1987 Read with Sections 124-A and 125 of the Railways Act, 1989 (for short, ‘the Act’) on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, Secunderabad (for short, ‘the Tribunal’), claiming compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- consequent on the death of one Pallapu China Kondaiah, dismissing the claim.
2. The appellants are the applicants and the respondent is the respondent in O.A.A. No.1 of 2000. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter will be referred as they are arrayed in the Tribunal.
3. The facts of the case are as follows :
They happened to be the husband and children of the deceased. On 25-12-1999 the deceased accompanied by two others boarded in train No.7405 at Singarayakonda to go to Secunderabad and on the way at K.M. No.220/5-3 in between Bibi Nagar and Ghatkesar railway stations, he slipped and fell down from the train and received injuries and died on the spot. He being a bona fide passenger of the train holding valid ticket, the applicants are entitled to the compensation of Rs.4,00,000/.
4. The respondent filed his written statement denying the pleas taken by the applicants and further claiming that no information was
given to the Assistant Station Master, Ghatkesar or Bibi Nagar railway stations about the fall of deceased from the train on 25-12-1999 and as per the inquest report the body was cut into pieces and was thrown on to the railway track and he was not a bona fide passenger of the train and as such the application should be dismissed.
5. On the strength of the pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues for trial and disposal :
6. On behalf of the applicants, the first of them got examined herself as A.W.1 and also got examined one P. Venkamma, sister-inlaw of the deceased as AW.2 and marked Exs.A-1 to A-7. Further, on behalf of the railways, the Station Superintendent, Ghatkesar railway station was examined as RW.1 and marked Ex.R-1. Further, relevant G.D. extract and reply from M.R.O. were obtained and marked as EXs.C-1 and C-2.
7. Examining the material available, the Tribunal held the first issue in favour of the applicants and the remaining issues against the applicants and in favour of the respondent and dismissed the application on the ground that the evidence of AW.2 provides that the deceased was standing by the side of the door of the compartment in the train in which she along with the deceased were traveling and when the train was running at high speed the deceased was wrapping
his tobacco to make a cigar and in that process, he slipped and fell down from the train and in such a case it would not come within the purview of ‘untoward incident’ as provided under section 123-C of the Railways Act, 1989 and further in the F.I.R. no mention was made about the ticket of the deceased and it is only at the time of inquest the tickets were produced and no explanation was given as to how the applicants came into possession of the tickets and further one Krishna RPC PC 553 on 25-12-1999 at 22-30 hours gave message that one male dead body was found lying by the side of the track between Ghatkesar and Bibinagar railways stations as in Ex.A-3 a copy of the inquest report and further according to RW.1 there was no information to the railway authorities about the fall of the deceased from the train at the said place and the applicants failed to take steps to summon the relevant railway documents and it is also observed by the Tribunal that non filing of the original inquest report issued by the concerned M.R.O. provides necessary confusion and it is further observed that if the alleged incident of fall of the deceased took place around 22-30 hours on 25-12-1999 the state of the corpse would have been described in the inquest report but as per the inquest report there was fresh blood which disproves the claim of the applicants of the probable time of fall from the train and with such observations the Tribunal dismissed the application.
8. As per the postmortem report, the post mortem examination was conducted on 26-12-19999 at 12-10 p.m. and found the following injuries :
1) Body was separated middle to the abdomen to upper part of the pubic symphasis,
and it was opined that the death would have occurred in between 12 to 20 hours prior to the post mortem examination.
9. Further, as per the inquest report (Ex.A-3) under column No.15, journey tickets bearing Nos.26941, 26942 and 26943 to travel from Singarayakonda to Secunderabad were with the deceased and further AW.2 was present at the time of inquest over the dead body along with his son. A perusal of Ex.A-3 also provides that the words “the tickets bearing Nos.26941, 26942 and 26943 were with the deceased” were interpolated, subsequently under column No.15 of it. It does not provide that the tickets were seized which is unnatural if the tickets were really found. According to AW.1 she produced them before the Tribunal, she did not explain as to how she came into possession of them. In F.I.R. there is nothing about the tickets. All these circumstances amply prove that he traveled without tickets and the tickets were planted for the purpose of this case. Ex.A-4 post mortem report copy provides that the same examination commenced over the dead body of the deceased from 12-10 p.m. on 26-12-1999 and it was opined that the death might have occurred 12 to 20 hours prior to that examination which agree with the claim of the applicants about the time of fall. It was given by a technical expert and hence it is authenticated compared to the inquest report about the time of death.
However, for the other reasons discussed the Appeal is not tenable. The Tribunal gave the correct decision and it need not be interfered with.
In the result, the Appeal is dismissed confirming the order of the Tribunal without costs.
___________________________ G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY, J Dated:18-03-2011. Dsh.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Railway Claims Tribunal's dismissal of the compensation claim.
Whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger and the death resulted from an untoward incidental fall.
Whether the evidence regarding the ticket and timing of death established a railway compensation claim.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Pallapu Ankamma and two others
The Union of India
G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
