THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU C.M.A. No. 1229 of 2005 O R D E R: This civil miscellaneous appeal, under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, is directed against an order made in OAA No. 216 of 2001 dated 14.9.2005 on the file of Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, Secunderabad, whereunder the application filed by the respondent claiming compensation of Rs.4.00 lakhs for the death of his wife Chokka Suramma in an untoward incident of accidental fall from the train on 6/7.8.2001, was allowed. Appellant is the South Central Railway and respondent is the claimant. For the purpose of convenience, parties are referred to, as arrayed in the OAA. It appears, an application under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act read with Section 124-A and 125 of the Railways Act was filed claiming compensation of Rs.4.00 lakhs for the death of the wife of the claimant, namely, Chokka Suramma, in an untoward incident of accidental fall from the train. According to the applicant, deceased, along with her husband and father, came to Chirala Railway Station and purchased three tickets bearing Nos. 35132623 to 35132625, from Chirala to Pithapuram and boarded Train No. 7487 Tirumala Express at about 01.00 hrs., and due to heavy rush in the compartment, the father of the deceased and her husband could not board the train. Due to rush in the train and due to jolts, deceased fell down from the train, as a result of which she was run over and killed. Respondent-Railways filed written statement denying the claim and stated that Tirumala Express was not overcrowded and it is quite unbelievable that out of three, for whom the deceased has purchased tickets, deceased alone traveled by Tirumala Express and the other two were left out at the platform at Chirala Station. Deceased is not a bona fide passenger and the ticket is a planted one. It is also denied that the accident is an untoward incident and the applicant is entitled for compensation. On the basis of the above pleadings, the following issues were framed: 1. Whether the applicant is the sole dependent of the deceased Chokka Suramma? 2. Whether the deceased was not a bona fide passenger of Train No. 7487 Tirumala Express traveling from Chirala to Pitapuram on 6/7.8.2001? 3. Whether the deceased died as a result of an untoward incident of accidental fall from the said train at Km 340/10? 4. To what relief? The applicant examined himself as AW-1 through whom sworn affidavit dated 23.12.2003 was filed and the documents Exs.A-1 to A-7 were marked. AW-2 was also examined on behalf of the applicant. Whereas, Guard of the Train was examined as RW-1 on behalf of the Railways. However, neither of them was cross-examined. After careful consideration of the entire material, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the applicant was a dependent of the deceased under Section 123(b)(i) of the Railways Act and the deceased was a bona fide passenger of Tirumala Express on 6/7.8.2001 and she was traveling from Chirala to Pithapuram. Ticket No. 35132623 was also mentioned in the inquest report, having been recovered from the body of the deceased. Respondent-Railways have not disputed the genuineness of the ticket. Therefore, it was held that she was a bona fide passenger. Further, it was held that Chokka Suramma died due to an untoward incident of accidental fall from passenger train. Therefore, the Tribunal held that applicant is entitled for compensation of Rs.4.00 lakhs. Aggrieved thereby, the present appeal is filed. Learned counsel for the appellant Sri BHR Chowdary strenuously contended that firstly there was no reason why a lady passenger (deceased) boarded the train and the husband and father of the deceased were left over. This itself shows that the deceased was not traveling by holding any valid ticket and the ticket was a planted one. But, however, absolutely there was no evidence to show that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger. In fact, in the inquest report, ticket No.35132623 was noted to have been recovered from the body of the deceased. Apart from that, the other tickets held by father and husband of the deceased were also not in dispute. The fact that the accident occurred on the platform when the train reached Chirala Railway Station on 6/7.8.2001 is also not in dispute. In the absence of any contra evidence, the evidence adduced on behalf of the applicant cannot be disbelieved and, therefore, the Tribunal has rightly believed the evidence adduced on behalf of the applicant and came to the conclusion on the basis of both oral and documentary evidence that the applicant was a dependent, deceased was a bona fide passenger and the accident that occurred was an untoward incident of accidental fall from the train. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the Tribunal has not committed any error calling for interference of this Court under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act. The appeal is devoid of merit and liable to be dismissed and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU. Date: 12-8-2010. MVB.