1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION jmi FIRST APPEAL NO.1704 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.222 OF 2009. Shri Dattaram S. Davarde & Anr. .Appellants. v/s. The Union of India. ..Respondent. .... Mr. G.M. Mohanrao, for Appellants. Mr. T.J. Pandian, for the Respondent. .... CORAM : S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. DATE : 11TH NOVEMBER 2009. P.C. Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties. 2. The appellants are the original claimants who filed a claim before the Railway Claims Tribunal claiming compensation on account of death of the son of the appellant no.1 as a result of accidental fall from a running local train near Thane Railway Station. The claim petition has been dismissed by the learned Members of the Railway Tribunal by observing that it is not stated by the appellants whether the deceased was married or unmarried and whether the deceased was financially supporting the appellants. By making this 2 observation the Tribunal held that the appellants cannot be termed the dependants of the deceased within the meaning of section 123(c) of the Railways Act. 3. The learned Advocate appearing for the appellants has placed reliance on a decision of this Court dated 4 th April 2006 in First Appeal No. 1931 of 2005 (Smt. Geeta Tanaji Kamble and Another) v/s. The Union of India). He submitted that the facts of the case in the said decision were almost identical with the facts of the case in the present appeal. He submitted that an opportunity deserves to be granted to the appellants to lead evidence to show that the deceased was not married and he was financially supporting the appellants. 4. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellants. Considering the fact that Claim Petition filed by the appellants has been dismissed on the ground that there was no evidence to show that the deceased was unmarried and that he was financially supporting the appellants, an opportunity deserves to be granted to the appellants to go back before the Tribunal and to 3 produce relevant material. Same is the course adopted by this Court in decision dated 4 th April 2006. 5. Hence, I pass the following order :- (i) The impugned judgment and order dated 12 th September 2007 is quashed and set aside and O.A. No.2002/428 is restored before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, Mumbai. (ii) The Railway Claims Tribunal will give opportunity to the appellants to lead evidence. (iii) The Claims Tribunal will decide the Claim Petition as expeditiously as possible. (iv) All contentions of the parties on merits are kept open. 6. The first appeal is disposed of. 7. The civil application is accordingly disposed of. [ S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. ]