THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU C.M.A.No.1032 of 2008 JUDGMENT: 1 This appeal is directed against the order dated 09.09.2005 passed in O.A.A.No.102 of 1999 on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, Secunderabad whereunder and whereby the claim petition filed by the applicant seeking compensation for the injuries sustained by him was dismissed. 2 Brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the appeal are that on 10.01.1999, the applicant, while travelling from Samalkot to Tuni by train No.435 Rajahmundry to Visakhapatnam passenger in general compartment, slipped and fell down when the train reached Ravikampadu and sustained injury to his left foot and thereafter he was admitted in the railway hospital first and then to Government Hospital Tirupati for treatment. Hence, the applicant filed the said claim application before the Tribunal seeking compensation from the railways. 3 The respondent (Railways) contested the said claim petition by filing written statement contending that the Deputy Superintendent gave information that a beggar while trying to enter from off-side when the train was arriving, he fell down and sustained injuries and so it is not an untoward incident and therefore prayed to dismiss the claim petition. 4 While the claim petition is pending before the Tribunal, the applicant (injured) died and his legal representatives sought to be impleaded by substitution so as to continue the proceedings. The Tribunal by observing that a reading of Section 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989 does not indicate that there is any contractual liability between the insurer and the dependents of the deceased passengers to award damages; and the liability of the Railways is only tortuous liability which is to be determined on considering the evidence and in case the applicant dies before the claim is adjudicated, the cause of action does not survive and the proceedings would abate and accordingly dismissed the claim application. Hence the present appeal by the legal representatives of the deceased/applicant. 5 The learned counsel for the appellants contended that this court was pleased to allow the appeals arise out of the same common order and the same is reported in United India Insurance Company Limited Vs. E.Laxma Reddy (died) per L.Rs. and others[1] and prayed to set aside the impugned award. 6 Now the point for consideration is whether the legal representatives of the deceased / original applicant are entitled to the compensation even if the original applicant dies before the adjudication of the claim petition? 7 In E.Laxma Reddy case (1 supra) this court held at para No.9 as follows: “….. it is true that compensation was claimed by the 1st respondent, for the injuries sustained by him. Even before his claim was decided, he died. His wife and son came on record. The liability of the owner of the vehicle and the insurer, to pay compensation for the injuries of a passenger, does not come to an end, in case, the claimant dies before the claim is settled. Their liability subsists and the legal representatives of the claimant would step into the shoes of the claimant. The liability would not be towards legal representatives, on account of the accident itself. The entitlement of the legal representatives would be confined to the amount, which the deceased claimant could have recovered, had he been alive. No exception can be taken for the approach of the Tribunal, which treated the said amount as the estate, it lease connotes the entitlement of the respondents 2 and 3 to receive the compensation that was payable, on account of the injuries to the deceased 1st respondent.” 8 Following the said judgment, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The matter is remitted to the Tribunal directing the Tribunal to give two months time to the applicants to enable them to adduce evidence and thereafter two months time shall be given to the Railway Administration for the purpose of adducing their evidence, if any and thereafter pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Since there are some lapses on the part of the applicants, they are not entitled to interest on the compensation amount if any granted from the date of application till the date of award. No costs. ____________ K.C. BHANU, J. 12.10.2011 Kvsn [1] 2006 (3) ALT 414