IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.3555 OF 2004 Between: Johani Tigga .....APPELLANT AND The Union of India, represented by its General Manager, South Central Railway, Rail Nilayam, Secunderabad ....RESPONDENT The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.3555 OF 2004 JUDGMENT: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, is directed against the order, dated 04.06.2004 in O.A.A.No.66 of 1999, on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, Secunderabad, whereunder and whereby, the claim petition filed by the appellant, claiming compensation consequent on the death of the deceased, was dismissed on the ground that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger in the train. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the present miscellaneous appeal may be stated as follows: One, Shiba Tigga (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the deceased’), had been to Vijayawada from his native place Tetrabhal, Orissa, to attend Railway Recruitment Board examination on 10.01.1999. After writing the exam, he was returning in the same night and purchased ticket No.11068 from Vijayawada to Rourkela, so as to board train No.8690, Alleppey Bokaro Steel City/Tatanagar express, in II class general compartment. While traveling in the train, he slipped and fell down from the running train at Km No.454/32-33 between Gannavaram and Talaprole railway stations in the morning hours, sustained multiple injuries and died instantaneously. Basing on the report given by the Deputy Station Superintendent, police registered a case and conducted inquest on the dead body of the deceased. The inquest mediators opined that the deceased died as a result of injuries sustained by him in the accident. Thereafter, the dead body of the deceased was subjected to necropsy by the doctor, who opined that the deceased died due to multiple injuries sustained by him and issued Ex.A-8, Postmortem Examination Report. 3. The railways filed the written statement stating that train No.8690 leaves from Vijayawada at 06:20 hours and ticket bearing No.11068 has been issued in the morning shift between 06:00 hours on 10.01.1999 and not in the night of 10.01.1999 as pleaded. Therefore the deceased was not a bona fide passenger travelling in the train. 4. Basing on the above pleadings the following issues have been framed by the Tribunal: “1. Whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger of train No.8690 Allepy – Bokaro Steel City Express on 10/11.01.1999 as alleged? 2. Whether the deceased died as a result of an untoward incident of accidental fall from the train? 3. Whether the applicant is the dependant of the deceased? 4. To what relief?” 5. To substantiate the case of the applicant, the applicant filed her affidavit and Exs.A-1 to A-9 were got marked. On behalf of respondent, RWs.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.R-1 and R-2 were got marked. 6. The Tribunal upon considering the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger, and therefore, dismissed the claim petition. Challenging the same, the present appeal is filed by the applicant. 7. Now the point for consideration is whether the order passed by the Tribunal is correct, legal and proper? 8. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the deceased was a bona fide passenger; that he came to Vijayawada to write Railway Recruitment Board examination; that he purchased ticket No.11068 to travel from Vijayawada to Rourkela and boarded train No.8690 Alleppy Bokaro Steel City/Tatanagar express and he fell accidentally from the train and died and therefore, he was a bona fide passenger and hence, prays to set aside the impugned order. 9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent opposed the same on the ground that the evidence of RW.2 would clearly go to show that the ticket has been issued in the morning hours of 10.01.1999, but not on the night of 10.01.1999; that he was not a bona fide passenger; that the ticket purchased by the deceased is not to travel in the Alleppey Bokaro Steel City/Tatanagar express from Vijayawada to Rourkela and therefore, the Tribunal after considering the evidence rightly came to the conclusion that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger and hence, he prays to dismiss the appeal. 10. There is no dispute about the death of the deceased while he was traveling in the Alleppey Bokaro Steel City/Tatanagar express from Vijayawada to Rourkela. It is the case of the claimant that the deceased fell down accidentally at Km No.454/32-33 in between Gannavaram and Talaprole railway stations while he was traveling in the Alleppey Bokaro Steel City/Tatanagar express train. The inquest mediators opined that the deceased died as a result of injuries sustained by him, as he has fallen from the running train. Similarly, the doctor, who conducted necropsy, opined that the deceased died as a result of the injuries sustained by him. The death of the deceased by falling from the running train is not in dispute. 11. The Claims Tribunal dismissed the claim application of the appellant on the sole ground that the ticket has been issued after the train had left, in which the deceased was performing the journey and therefore, the deceased was not a bona fide passenger. The evidence of RW.2 would go to show that the ticket has been issued before 06:00 hours on 10.01.1999 for traveling in the Alleppey Bokaro Steel City/Tatanagar express; that the ticket has been fabricated subsequently; that the register pertaining to the period from 01.01.1999 to 10.01.1999 shows the amount collected by him for issuing the ticket No.11068. 12. Ex.A.9 is the Xerox copy of the Hall ticket, which is not in dispute. The Hall ticket would clearly go to show that it was issued by the Railway Recruitment Board for writing examination at Sharada College, Vijayawada. As seen from Ex.A.9 – Xerox copy of Hall Ticket, it would clearly go to show that the deceased can travel from Rurkela to Vijayawada between 03.01.1999 to 10.01.1999. Similarly, on return journey he can undertake journey from Vijayawada to Rurkela from 10.01.1999 to 17.01.1999. Therefore, Ex.A9 is not at all being considered by the Tribunal to resolve the dispute whether the deceased was bona fide passenger or not. When Ex.A.9, which is not in dispute, would clearly go to show that the deceased can travel from Vijayawada to Rurkela on any day between 10.01.1999 to 17.01.1999, the contention of the Railways that he was not a bona fide passenger is untenable and devoid of merit. Admittedly, the deceased purchased the ticket on 10.01.1999, so as to undertake journey from Vijayawada to Rurkela. The death of the deceased by accidental fall from the train is not in dispute. Ex.A.9 clearly shows that the deceased was a bona fide passenger. Admittedly, police seized the ticket from the dead body of the deceased at the time of conducting inquest. Therefore, the question of planting the ticket in the shirt pocket or pant pocket of the deceased does not arise, in view of the fact that he is a resident of a far of village in Orissa state. Therefore, the claimant is entitled for the compensation of Rs.4,00,000/-. 13. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed, granting compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- to the claimant and she is also entitled for interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of award and thereafter, at the rate of 9% per annum till the date of realization. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J June 18, 2010 MD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.3555 OF 2004 June 18, 2010