IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.37 of 2009 THE UNION OF INDIA through its General Manager, North Eastern Railway, Gorakhpur (UP) …Appellant Versus 1. RAM SUNDER SAH son of Ram Khelawan Sah & 2. Kusma Devi wife of Ram Sunder Sah Both resident of village- Maharathpur, P.S. & District- Begusarai …Respondents ----------- For the appellant : Mr. A. Amanullah, Advocate For the respondent no.2: Mr. Pravin Kumar Gupta, Advocate ------------ 7/ 10.03.2011 Heard the parties. The appellant is aggrieved with the order dated 31.10.2008 passed in O.A No.99000066 of 1999 by which the Railway Claims Tribunal, Patna Bench, has directed the appellant to pay a sum of rupees four lacs for the unfortunate death of one Arun Sah, who happens to be the son of the claimants. It has been submitted that the deceased was not a bonafide passenger since there was no recovery of railway ticket from his possession as also that the factum of accident was disputed. The appellant further contends that the deceased, in fact, died on account of self inflicted injuries because it was the case of his uncle that he had gone to the door of the compartment even before the station had arrived and, therefore, lost his life in the confusion that occurred in course of embarking and disembarking. He submits that it is improbable that the deceased, who was a young man would have asked his uncle (AW 2), who was aged about 60 years, to purchase a ticket and, therefore, he was not a bonafide passenger. Further submission is that there is no record before the Station Master of the said station with regard to any accident having been 2 taken place on the said date for which reason he has advanced his argument that factum of accident was disputed. On the other hand, on going through the judgment impugned, I find that there was unimpeachable material that, indeed, an accident had taken place on the date of occurrence and for this reason First Information Report, final report, inquest report and post mortem report were brought on record. In view of such, submission that no accident had taken place has to be rejected. Further, just because the witnesses have deposed that the deceased had gone to the door before the station had arrived and thereafter the accident took place it cannot be said that the accident was self inflicted. Moreover, the ticket not having been found on the person of the deceased has to be disregarded in the facts of the case since it is not unnatural for it to be misplaced in the confusion which is natural after an accident. In view of such, this appeal is dismissed. It has been submitted on behalf of the respondents that during the pendency of this appeal respondent no.1 died and, therefore, now respondent no.2 i.e. Kusma Devi, mother of the unfortunate deceased is the only claimant. The order of the Tribunal is clarified to the extent that compensation amount has to be disbursed only to the mother of the deceased after it is satisfied in this regard. JA/- (Anjana Prakash,J.)