In this appeal against a Railway Claims Tribunal order dismissing a compensation claim for death, the High Court held that applicants failed to prove the deceased was a bona fide passenger or that death resulted from an accident as no train ticket was recovered.
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.452 of 2016 was dismissed with 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.
[32s3 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SATURDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI
CIVIL MISCELLANEO US APPEA L NO: 452 OF 2016
. Appeal Under Section 23 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, l9g7 against the order dated 18-03-2016 made in oA lt(u).No.307 of 2oo1 on the file of thE court of Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, at Secunderabad.
Between:
...Appellants/Applicants
AND
Union of lndia, Rep., by its General Manager South Central Railways, Secunderabad.
..Respondents/Respondent
Counsel for the Appellants : SRl. MUNNANGT LAKSHMA REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent: KRTSHNA KISHORE KOWURI
(cENTRAL GOVERNMET COUNSEL)
The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE M,G.PRIYADARSINI CML MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.452 OF 2016
JUDGMENT:
Aggrieved by the dismissal Order passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bcnch (for brevity, 'the TribunalJ, in OA II (U) No.3O7 of 2OO8, dated 18.03.2O16, the applicant Nos. 1 to 4 have preferred the presenr appcal.
,t{(iP..t C'nru 152 2016
2
compartment and while travclling, when the train was passing between Nellore and Vedayapalem railway stations, the deceased accidentally slipped and fell down from the train at about lO_50 P.M., sustained injuries and died. The journey ticket of the deceased is stated to have been lost during thc accidcnt. Hencc the claim.
MG P,J Ona,152 2016
3
1 1. Now the point for consideration iswhethe r the orderpassed by the learned Commissioner is sustainable under [aw?
POINT:
4
MGI'.J Cnru 152 2016
examined as AW.l and has reiterated the avcrments of the application. According to AW. 1, on the date of incident the deceased along with his brother Abraham went to the Nellore Railway station to give send off to his sister Esther Rani. After giving send off to his sister, he l'rurchased journey ticket in the presence of his brother Abraham to go to Tirupati for having darshan of Lord Venkateshu,ara Su,amy and boarded train No.723O Sabari Express in a general compartment. During the journey when the train n,as passing betn cen Ne llore and Vedayapalem railway stations, thc deccased accidentally stipped and fell down from the train at about 1O-50 p.m., sustained injuries and died. Admittedly, she is nor an eyewitness to thc incident or purchasing journey ricket by the deccased. Furthcr no independent witness was examined by the applicants in supporr o[ their case. The applicants also failed to examine thc brothcr of the deceased viz., Abraham, who u,itnesscd the purchasing of journey ticket by the deceased. Thus, the question of purchasing journey ticket by the deceased is doubtful.
I3. Further trx.Al F.l.R. discloses that on the basis of the message received from the Station Superintendent, Nellore, u,hich is based on the inlormation given by the Keyman of Unit No.7 on 30.8.2008 at 11,00 hours that he found a male dead body at KM No.172/35- l73l l, lO mcters away from up line opposite Sidclu Hospital. According Lo Dx.A2 Inquest report, one pocket notc book
MGP J Ctttu t52 2(Jl6
5
I )
containing cell phone numbers, some papers, one identification card issued by Srinivasa Outsourcing Services PrivateLimited, Hyderabad with photograph and at a distance of 3 meterson uplinc track right black chappal, blue colour ballpen and one steelnail cutter were found and the dead body was found 6 metersawayfrom the track, but nojourney ticket was recovered from thedeceased. Further though the brother of the deceased-Abrahamwas cxamined by the police at the time of inquest, he did not stateanythingabout thcjourney ticket to the police. Ex.A3postmortemexamination report shows that the deceased sustained 1) crush injuryoi left hatf of the skull, face, left eye, 2) multiple fractures ofthe skullbones, lcft temporal, parietal, occipital bones, maxilla, mandible atmultipie sites including skull bones, 3) lacerated injuries over middleI /3rdot thigh on teft side and 4) fracture of the left femurlorvcr end abovc [hc knee joint and other internal injuries. Furlher itshowsthe lime of death as 5 to 7 days prior to postmortem cxaminationwhichwas conducted on 3 1.8.2OO8.
6
A4CP.J Cnru 452 2016
fall from the train since all other articles were found intact with the deceased exccpt the journey ticket. In view of the above facts and circumstances, it is clearly established through the evidence of AW. 1 coupled with the documents filed by them that the applicants failed to discharge their initial burden of proving that the deceased was not a bona fde passenger and no body witnessed while the deceased fallen down from the train. Hence, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Railway Claims Tribunal has discussed the evidence available on record in detail and came to a corrcct conclusion and rightly dismissed the claim application. Thus, there are no grounds to intcrfere with the hndings of the Tribunal and the appeal is devoid o[ merits and liable to be dismissed.
i5. in the rcsult, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed There shall bc no order as to costs.
Pending Miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
SD/- B.S. CHIRANJEEVI, JOINT REGISTRAR.
//TRUE COPY//
To,
SECTION OFFICER
1' The Railway craims Tribunar, secunderabad Bench, at secunderabad. 2. One CC to SRt. MUNNANGI LAKSHMA REDDi Advocate [OPUC] 3 One CC to SRt KR|SHNA KTSHORE KOWURT iCe rurnnr GoVERNMET COUNSEL) Advocate tOpUCl 4. Two CD Copies
ADK
HIGH COURT
DATED:18t11t2023
JUDGMENT
CMA.No.452 of 2016
1tr -g STAI6
q -/z
1 3 tEB 202[
i-)oo
*
t r')
Dg;; nx.-r.t
DISMISSING THE CMA WITHOUT COSTS
I tFul
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicants discharged their initial burden of proving the deceased was a bona fide passenger?
Whether the railway authorities should be liable for death alleged to occur due to accidental fall from the train?
Whether the impugned order of dismissal by the Railway Claims Tribunal was perverse?
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Papitham Mary
Papitham Rajamma
Union of India
M.G. Priyadarsini
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
