Civil Miscellaneous Appeal against Railway Claims Tribunal order dismissing compensation claim for death of Jamas Sangala during train journey. Court upheld Tribunal finding that applicants failed to prove deceased purchased ticket or boarded train.
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal dismissed; no order as to 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.
[3253 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
TUESDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 109 OF 2019
Appeal filed under Section 23 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, against the Judgment and decree dated 15.11.2018 made in OA ll (U).No. 381 of 2013 on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench.
Between
Appellant No.2 and 3 are being minors, rep. by thier mother appellant No.1 Latha.
...Appellants/Applicants
AND
The Union of lndia, rep. by its General Manager, South Central Railway, Rail Nilayam, at Secunderabad.
...RespondenURespondent
Counsel for Appellants : Sri S. Chandrasekhar
Counsel for the Respondent : Sri Krishna Kishore Kovvuri Central Government Counsel
The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT
THE HoNoURABL ESMT. JUSTICE M.G. ARSINI CTVIL MIscELLAN EOUS APPEAL No. 109()F. 20L9 JUDGMENT:
Aggrieved by the dismissal Order passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench (for brevity, .the Tribunal,), in OA II(U) No.3gt of 2013, dated 15. 1 t.2OIg, the applicants have preferred the present appeal.
MGP,.I Cn,t109 2019
2
Station,Wardharegtstered the crime No 71 of 2008 and the incidenttook place near Vihirgaon Railwaystation' and nrr journey ticket wasrecovered, the Tribunalhas no tcrritorial jurisdiction'It is furthercontended that therc is no eyewitness to the incidentas well aspurchasing of journey ticketand travcl undertakenby the Hence, PraYedto deceased.So, he u'as not a bona fide passenger dismissthe aPPlication'
6.BeforethcTribunal,onbehaliofthezrpplicants,A.w.lwas examinedand got marked Exs A- 1 to A gOn behalf of respondent- railways,no witness was examined' howcver' Ex'R1rvas marked'
J
MGP,J Cma 109 2019
MG P.J Cna 1092019
4
bench that hasterritorial jurisdiction over the place from whichthe passenger obtains orpurchases his pass or ticket or rvherethe accident or untowardincident occurs orwherethe place of destination liesor where the claimant/deceascdnormallyresides.
5
MGP,J Cma I09 20t9
i5. In order to prove their case, the applicant No. I who is wife of the deceased was examined as AW. I and has reiterated the averments of the application and further deposed that, on 15.9.2008 at about 1O_OO A.M. her deceased husbard left the house from Chandrapur to attend the lltr. day death ceremony of late Sukkapala, who is her sister,s sister in law and informed that he would go to Ballarshah and from there he would go to Kazipet in any passenger train. On the same day in the evening hours she tried to contact her husband but she could not get any response and on enquiry, her sister at Kazipet, she came to know that her husband did not reach KazipeL. She started searching her husband rn their relaLives house as well as the friends of her deceased husband and gave complaint to the police. After one month, her neighbours informcd that one person aged about 30 vears accidentally fallen down lrom a passenger train near Vihirigaon on i5.9.2OO8 and received grievous injuries and died and also stated that the Ballarsha railway police conducted enquiry in the above said matter. After knowing the same, she along with the brother of the deceased and others rushed to Ballarshah, contacted the railway police, who informed that on fS.9.2OOg one person aged about 30 years accidentally fallen down from train No.324 near Vihirigaon and received grievous injuries. He was brought to Ballarshah and given treatment, but he died. The police further
iITC P.J ('nt I 09 20 I9
6
informed thatbecause they could not, identify the deceased, they buried thedead body with Governmentexpenditure and shon'edthe photos of deceasedand a damaged Reliance mobile phone'one rold gold chainand two rold gold rings and a watchbelongto deceased' Then sheidentiiredand came to the conclusion that her husband fallen downfrom train No 324 on 15'9'2008at Vihirigaon ln supportof their case, Exs Al to A9 documentsare filcd'
purchasingthe 17. Admittedly,nobody has seen the deceased ticket togo to Ballarsha nor boarded the train on [hedateof incident.Nobody witnessedwhile he was falling dort'nfromthe train.Furtherno journey ticketu'as recovered from the possession ofthedeceased.Thus,theapplicantsfaitedtodischargetheirinitial burden ofprovingthat the dcceased purchased thc ticket and boardedthe train on the date o[ incidentTherefore'the deceased
MGP,J Cma 109 2019
7
cannot be treated as a bona fde passerrger and as such, the applicants are not entitled for compensation. In Ex.Rl Divisional Railway Manager's report also, it is mentioned that the deceased was not having any railway ticket or authority for his journey. In view of the above facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Tribunal has rightly dismissed the application. There are no grounds to interfere with the hndings of the Tribunal and the appeal is devoid of meri[s. Hence the appeal is liable to be dismissed.
Pending Miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed
Sd/- K. SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//
SECTI N OFFICER
To,
HIGH COURT
DATED:0711112023
JUDGMENT
CMA.No.109 of 2019
i=:r<br>1:lE ii
( r!
oo ? 6 fli't irt
t
Pnrt)trLi<br>
DISMISSING THE CMA WITHOUT COSTS @q'
4-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicants discharged the initial burden of proving that the deceased was a bona fide passenger who purchased a ticket and boarded the train.
Whether the Railway Claims Tribunal had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the claim regarding the accident and death near Vihirgaon station.
Whether the Railways successfully established that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger, thereby entitling the applicants to compensation.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Latha, Wo late Sri Jamas Sangala
Thomos, s/o late Sri Jamas Sangala
Aaradhana, D/o late Sri Jamas Sangala
The Union of India, rep. by its General Manager, South Central Railway
M.G. PRIYADARSINI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
