THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO.382 OF 2010 JUDGMENT: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal by the Railways under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, is preferred aggrieved by the order, dated 05-02-2010 in O.A.A No.266 of 2004 on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench at Secunderabad, whereunder and whereby the application filed by the applicants claiming compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- consequent upon the death of C.K.Rajappa (hereinafter referred to as ‘the deceased’) in an untoward incident was allowed directing the Railways to pay the said amount with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of application till the date of award and thereafter at 9% p.a. till the date of actual payment. 2. Brief facts are that on 11-10-2004 the deceased purchased a ticket and was traveling by Pinakini express from Vijayawada to Chennai, but when the train was passing between Alluru Road and Talamanchi stations, he fell down from the train and died and the ticket was lost in the accident. Hence, the claim application. 3. The Railways filed written statement denying the averments made in the claim application and stated that no ticket was found with the deceased. As per the inquest report though two other tickets from Bangalore to Kachiguda and from Hyderabad to Vijayawada were found on him and since the deceased did not have a valid ticket to travel in Pinakini express, he was not a bona fide passenger and the death must have been occurred by the actions of the deceased himself for which the Railways are not liable to pay compensation. 4. The Claims Tribunal, after considering the evidence on record, allowed the claim application as stated above. Challenging the same, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the Railways. 5. Now the point for consideration is whether the order of the Claims Tribunal is correct, legal and proper? 6. For the purpose of claiming compensation under Section 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989 (for short ‘the Act’), two requirements have to be satisfied, firstly, there must be untoward incident whereunder a person died. Untoward incident includes a person falling from the running train accidentally. Secondly, a person who died or sustained injuries must be a bona fide passenger travelling in the train with a valid ticket. If these requirements are proved, then the applicants are entitled for compensation. If the Railways want to resist the claim, it is has to prove that no untoward incident had happened or deceased was not a bona fide passenger traveling in a train carrying passengers or its case falls under anyone of the exceptions as provided under proviso to Section 124-A of the Act. 7. The dependency certificate issued by the competent authority has not been filed by the applicants into the Court. For the purpose of claiming compensation under Section 124-A of the Act, it must be shown that the applicants must be dependents of the deceased who died in an untoward incident. No such certificate was filed to show that the applicants are the dependents of the deceased. In the absence of any evidence with regard to their dependency, the finding of the Tribunal is unwarranted. Hence, the appeal is liable to be allowed. 8. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed. However, the matter is remanded to the Tribunal giving opportunity to the applicants to produce necessary evidence with regard to their dependency within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter, two months time shall be given to the Railways to enable it to adduce rebuttal evidence, if any. No costs. ________________ K.C. BHANU, J DATED: 13-10-2011 Hsd