IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU C.M.A.No.157 of 2006 Date: 26th August, 2010 Between: Smt.Razia Begum and others. .. Petitioners And Union of India, represented by its General Manager, South Eastern Railway, Kolkata. .. Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU C.M.A.No.157 of 2006 ORAL JUDGMENT: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 23 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 is directed against the order made in O.A.A.No.122 of 1999 dated 2.11.2005 on the file of the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, Secunderabad, whereunder the application filed by the appellants under Section 16 of Railway Claims Tribunal’s Act read with Section 124-A and 125 of Railways Act claiming compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- on account of death of husband of first applicant-appellant was dismissed. Appellants are applicants and respondent is South Eastern Railways. It appears, Appellant-Applicants filed the above O.A.A. claiming a compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- for the death of Meeran Saheb (husband of first appellant). It was their case that the deceased Meeran Saheb while traveling in Train No.8030 Howrah – Kurla Express from Gondia to Tumsur Road with ticket, died in an untoward incident of accidental fall from the Train at Tumsur Railway Station. The Respondent-Railways denied the case of the applicants and also denied that the deceased was a bona fide passenger. Further, it was stated that there was no untoward incident report at Tumsur Railway Station on the fateful day and also denied its liability for payment of compensation. On the basis of the above pleadings, the following issues were settled for trial: 1. Whether the applicants are dependants of the deceased Meeran Saheb? 2. Whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger of Train No.8030 Howrah – Kurla Express traveling from Gondia to Tumsur on 9.3.1998 as alleged? 3. Whether the deceased died as a result of an untoward incident of accidental fall from the train at Tumsur Railway Station? 4. To what relief? Originally, the case was filed before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur, where it was numbered as 43/OAII/RCT/NGP/99 and while it was pending, the same was transferred to the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, Secunderabad on the application made by the applicants. In support of the case of applicants, first applicant filed her affidavit dated 10.6.2005 and marked documents Exs.A1 to A4. On the other hand, respondent-Railway did not choose to examine anybody. After going through the evidence and material on record, the Tribunal, insofar as Issue No.1 is concerned, gave a finding that the applicants are not the dependants of the deceased Meeran Saheb, since only unattested photo copy of the alleged ration card was filed, which cannot be admitted in evidence. Insofar as Issue Nos.2 and 3 are concerned, the Tribunal held that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger and the death of the deceased cannot be called as untoward incident of accidental fall from the Train at Tumsur Railway Station. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present C.M.A. is filed. I have given my earnest consideration to the respective submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the impugned order and other material made available on record. The accident, as such, is not denied. On the basis of the inquest report-Ex.A2, it is stated that the deceased traveled in Azad Hind Express and while trying to get down from the said Train at Tumsur Railway Station, he accidentally fell down from the train and died. May be the deceased purchased ticket for Howrah-Kurla Express, he has boarded in Azad Hind Express and when attempted to get down from the running train, he died. This inference has been drawn from Ex.A4-final report submitted to Sub-Divisional Magistrate by the Government Railway Police, Gondia on 3.11.1998. Neither the applicants were cross-examined nor the Railways adduced any evidence contrary to the pleadings of the applicants. The affidavit filed in chief and the additional affidavit filed by the applicants went un- rebutted, therefore it must be deemed that the incident was an untoward incident of accidental fall from the Train. May be, ticket was not found at the time of inquest, but according to first applicant, a mutilated ticket dated 9.3.1998 showing Gondia to Tumsur was found in the inner pocket of deceased, and was in fact marked as Ex.A1. There was no denial as to the said ticket was not valid and a fabricated one. In fact A.W.1 has categorically stated that there was a little difference of time in running of those two trains from Gondia to Tumsur Road. Under those circumstances, in the absence of any eye witness, it cannot be said that the deceased had traveled in Azad Hind Express and not in Howrah-Kurla Express. There is some suspicion as to his travel, but that was not contested by the respondents and any adverse evidence was let in. It is also very interesting to notice that the deceased was wearing a Safari Dress and on his body Rs.1,000/- of Rs.10/- denomination were found and he was traveling a short distance from Gondia to Tumsur Road. Generally, businessmen will not travel without purchasing ticket, that too for a short distance from Gondia to Tumsur. Therefore, it must be deemed that the deceased died in an untoward incident of accidental fall from the train and was holding a valid ticket. Insofar as issue No.1 is concerned, according to the first applicant, deceased was her husband and to show her identity, she filed xerox copy of ration card, but that was not taken into consideration by the Tribunal stating that xerox copies cannot be admitted in evidence. I am of the opinion that when strict rules of evidence are not applicable, the Tribunal ought to have taken into consideration the xerox copy of ration card. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it must be held that the applicants are the dependants of the deceased Meeran Saheb who died in an untoward incident of accidental fall from the Train at Tumsur Railway Station. For all the above reasons, I am of the opinion that the claimants are the dependants of the deceased Meeran Saheb and the deceased was a bona fide passenger and the incident that took place was an untoward incident of accidental fall from Train attracting the provisions of Section 124-A of the Railways Act. Therefore, the appellants are entitled for a compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- for the death of Meeran Saheb along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of appeal till the date of realization. The C.M.A. is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. ______________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: 26.8.2010 DA