1 fa146 ssp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.146 OF 2005 Smt.Savitri Divakaran & Ors. ...Appellants vs. The Union of India ...Respondent Mr.G.J.Mohanrao for the appellants Mr.Anand Samant for the respondent CORAM : A.S.OKA,J. DATE : APRIL 19,2011 JUDGMENT : 1 Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the respondent. The appellants filed a claim under section 124-A of the Railways Act,1989 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) claiming compensation on account of alleged untoward incident as a result of which deceased M.C.Divakaran died. The first appellant is the widow of the deceased and the second and third appellants are the sons of the deceased. 2 On the basis of the documents on record, the learned Member of the Tribunal accepted the case of the respondent that while attempting to cross the tracks, the deceased was knocked down and therefore, this was not an untoward incident of fall from the train. Though inquest panchnama revealed that the deceased was possessing a season ticket and identity card, the Tribunal held that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger. 3 The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the burden was on the railways to establish that the 2 fa146 deceased did not die due to accidental fall but was knocked down in the process of crossing the tracks. He submitted that the said burden has not been discharged. He pointed out the receipt dated 10th March 1999 which is signed by the nephew of the deceased acknowledging receipt of the dead body and articles found on the person of the deceased. He submitted that the said receipt was prepared by the police constable attached to Kalyan Railway Police Station in which it is stated that the deceased fell down from the train while traveling from Thane to Ambernath. He submitted that the appellants could not prove the said document and could not lead evidence to show that it was the case of the accidental fall. He, therefore, prays that an order of remand may be passed to enable the appellants to adduce additional evidence. On instructions he states that even if the appellants succeed after remand, the appellants will not claim interest on the compensation amount. The learned counsel for the respondent supported the impugned Judgment. 4 I have considered the submissions. Inquest panchanama records that a valid railway season ticket and the identity card of the deceased was found on the person of the deceased. The Tribunal has disbelieved the case of the appellant of the accidental fall from the train. The alleged receipt dated 10 th March 1999 which is not exhibited shows that the deceased fell down from the train. The valid season ticket and identity card were found on the person of the deceased. This is a case where opportunity deserves to be granted to the appellants to adduce additional evidence. There will not be a serious prejudice to the respondent as the learned counsel for the appellants on instructions has stated that the appellants will not claim interest on the 3 fa146 compensation amount. 5 Hence, I pass the following order : i) Impugned Judgment and Order is quashed and set aside and original application no.2000 010 is restored and is remanded to the Railway Claims Tribunal for a fresh decision. ii)It will be open for the appellants to lead additional evidence. It will be also open for the respondent to lead evidence in rebuttal. iii)After considering the additional evidence and the evidence which is already on record, the Tribunal will decide the claim application afresh. iv)The statement made by the appellants that they will not claim interest on the compensation amount is accepted. v) Hearing of the claim application is expedited. vi)Appeal is partly allowed in above terms. vii)There will be no order as to costs. JUDGE