Allowed

Abha Viswa Karma (Died) and 2 Othrs v. Union of India, Secbad

Telangana HC4 Oct 2018CMA/219/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Supreme Court allowed a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal against a Railway Claims Tribunal order dismissing a death claim. The Court remitted the matter to the Tribunal, permitting the appellants to lead further evidence to establish their dependency on the deceased before final disposal.

What did the court decide?

Civil Misc. Appeal allowed; order of Railway Claims Tribunal set aside; matter remitted for disposal afresh after permitting additional evidence.

Abha Viswa Karma (Died) and 2 Othrs Vs Union of India, Secbad — Telangana HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

THE HON’BLE Dr . JUSTI CE SHAMEEM AKTHER

¶2

Civil Miscellan eou s Appeal No.2 1 9 of 2 0 1 4

¶3

JUDGMENT:

¶4

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, is filed by the appellantsapplicants, challenging the order, dated 09.08.2012, passed in O.A.A.No.339 of 2008 by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench at Secunderabad (‘the Tribunal’, for brevity).

¶5

2 . Heard the learned counsel for the appellants-applicants, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Railways and perused the record.

¶6

3 . The learned counsel for the appellants-applicants would contend that the Tribunal dismissed the claim petition holding that the appellants-applicants failed to prove that they are the dependants of the deceased. Now, the appellants-applicants intend to file relevant documents to substantiate that they are dependants on the deceased and ultimately requested this Court to remit the matter to the Tribunal for disposal of the claim petition afresh, after affording opportunity to the appellants-applicants to lead additional evidence on the said aspect.

¶7

4 . Admittedly, the Tribunal dismissed the claim petition holding that the appellants-claimants failed to prove that they are the dependants of the deceased. The Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, is a beneficial legislation and in a case of this nature, pragmatic approach has to be adopted in order to permit the appellants-claimants to adduce further evidence. Hence, this Court

¶8

-2 -

¶9

is of the view that this is a fit case to permit the appellantsclaimants to lead further evidence.

¶10

5 . The appeal is allowed accordingly, by setting aside the order, dated 09.08.2012, passed in O.A.A.No.339 of 2008 by the Tribunal. The matter is remitted to the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench at Secunderabad, with a direction to restore O.A.A.No.339 of 2008, permit the appellants/ claimants to lead further evidence, if any, and dispose of the same afresh, in accordance with law, after affording reasonable opportunity to both the parties. The Tribunal shall complete the said exercise as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶11

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶12

Pending Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶13

Dr . SHAMEEM AKTHER, J

¶14

04^th October, 2018 Bvv

Abha Viswa Karma (Died) and 2 Othrs v. Union of India, Secbad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abha Viswa Karma (Died) and 2 Othrs v. Union of India, Secbad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chanda Naga Bhushanam Vs M. Rama Raju and Another

The New India Assurance Company Limited Vs Kunchala Padma

V.Rama Naidu Vs v.Damu Naidu , Damodar Naidu

Akshay , Gaurav Singh Vs the Apsrtc

G. Sulochana and 2 Others Vs Union of India

S.Paramkusam and 2 Others Vs Union of India