1 54 fa.1266.11 ndm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 1266 OF 2011 Shripatsingh Baijnath Yadav and anr. ... Appellants Versus Union of India. ... Respondent ----- Mr. Shrishailya Deshmukh i/b Mr.Pravin B. Gole for the Appellants. Mr. T.J.Pandian for the Respondent. ----- CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 15 th July, 2011. P.C. 1 Admit. Advocate for the Respondent waives service. Immediately, taken up for final hearing. 2 The Appellants filed a claim application before the Railway Claims Tribunal by invoking Section 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989. The claim application has been dismissed by the impugned judgment and order on the ground that the Appellants could not establish that the deceased was holding a valid ticket. The Tribunal observed that though the Appellants have contended that the deceased had purchased a return 2 54 fa.1266.11 ticket at Dadar Railway Station in presence of his co-worker Mr.Rajan Dinesh Singh, the said co-worker has not been examined as a witness. Therefore, the Tribunal disbelieved the case of the Appellants that the deceased was a bonafide passenger. 3 The learned counsel appearing for the Appellants submitted that an opportunity may be granted to the Appellants to examine the said witness Mr.Rajan Dinesh Singh to enable them to establish their claim. His submission is that the burden was on the Respondent to prove that the deceased was not a bonafide passenger. The learned counsel appearing for the Respondent supported the impugned judgment and order. 4 The Tribunal has dismissed the claim application by drawing adverse inference against the Appellants for not examining the said witness. An opportunity deserves to be granted to the Appellants to examine the said witness and therefore, an order of remand deserves to be passed. 3 54 fa.1266.11 5 Hence, I pass the following order: i. The impugned judgment and order dated 27 th April, 2009 is quashed and set aside and Case No. OA 631 of 2004 is restored to the Railway Claims Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, at Mumbai ; ii. The Appellants are permitted to adduce further evidence including the examination of the said witness Mr.Rajan Dinesh Singh. It is obvious that even the Respondent is entitled to adduce evidence in rebuttal ; iii. The Tribunal will decide the claim application afresh after considering the evidence, which is already adduced and the evidence adduced after the remand ; iv. All contentions of the parties on merits are kept open ; and v. Appeal is partly allowed on above terms with no order as to costs. [ A.S.OKA, J ]