IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2010 / 5TH SRAVANA 1932 MFA.No. 112 of 2004() ------------------------------- OA.238/2002 of RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT IN OA. NO.238/02 ----------------------------------------------------------------- RAJAMANI, W/O. KUMARAVELU, AGED 42 YEARS, HOUSE NO.8/170, MUKKUVANDA PARAMBATH COLONY, PALLOOR P.O., MAHE. BY ADV. SRI.E.C.BINEESH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT IN O.A. NO.238/02 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, CHENNAI. ADV. SRI.M.C.CHERIAN,SR.SC.,RAILWAYS THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON ON 27/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss A.K.BAHSEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= M.F.A. No. 112 of 2004 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 27th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT Barkath Ali, J. Appellant is the applicant in O.A. No.238 of 2002 before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench. She sustained injuries in Kadalundi Train Accident that happened on June 22, 2001, involving Mangalore-Chennai Mail (Train No.6602). Claiming a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-, she filed the O.A. under section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam. 2. Applicant was examined as PW1 and and Exts.A1 and A2 were marked on the side of the applicant before the Tribunal. No evidence was adduced by the respondent. The Tribunal, on an appreciation of evidence, awarded a compensation of Rs.15,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the registration of the case i.e., September 2, 2002 till realization. The applicant has now come up in appeal MFA 112/2004 2 challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned standing counsel for the respondent Railway. 4. The fact that the appellant was a bona fide passenger in Mangalore-Chennai Mail No.6602 on June 22, 2001, which fell into the Kadalundi river, when the bridge collapsed and that she sustained injuries in the accident are not challenged in this appeal. Only question, which arise for consideration, is whether the claimant is entitled to any enhanced compensation. 5. Claimant sustained injuries to her head, left shoulder and right lower chest, according to the claimant. But in Ext.A2 certificate issued from the General Hospital, Mahe it is stated that she sustained only minor injuries. Ext.A1 discharge slip shows there there was no burn injuries. Taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained, and the period of treatment she had undergone, we feel that compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just MFA 112/2004 3 and reasonable. It follows that the appellant is not entitled to any enhanced compensation. Therefore, the appeal has to be dismissed. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. No cost. A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE. P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. mn.