FAO No.183/2010 Page 1 of 3 UNREPORTABLE * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO No.183/2010 & C.M. No.8343/2010 Date of Decision: May 05, 2010 UNION OF INDIA ..... Appellant through Mr. G.S.Chaturvedi, Advocate with Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate versus KASHMIR KAUR & ORS ..... Respondents through Ms. Pratima N. Chaudhary, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE REKHA SHARMA 1. Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the ‘Digest’? No REKHA SHARMA, J. (ORAL) This appeal has been preferred against the order of Railway Claims Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’) dated November 20, 2009. By virtue of the impugned order, the appellant has been directed to pay to the respondents who are the legal heirs of late Ajit Singh, a sum of Rs.4 lacs by way of compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum. It is not in dispute that the said Ajit Singh along with Jasbir Singh and Kulwant Singh had boarded train No.9223 Ahmadabad – Jammu Tawi Express on April 27, 2007. Their place of FAO No.183/2010 Page 2 of 3 destination was Jalandhar. On the following day, i.e. on April 28, 2007 at about 9.00/10.00 a.m. when the train reached near Mallawala Khas, Ajit Singh fell down from the running train resulting in his death. It is the case of the respondents that Ajit Singh had gone to the toilet and after he came out from there, the train started jerking and as a result thereof, he fell down from the running train. On the other hand, it is the case of the appellant that Ajit Singh did not fall from the train because of any jerk but he committed suicide by jumping out of the running train, as he was in a state of depression. The appellant has based its so-called theory of suicide on the statement of Kulwant Singh who was travelling with Ajit Singh. It is stated that the said Kulwant Singh soon after the accident made a statement to the police and in his that statement, he informed the police that Ajit Singh was behaving like a mad person because of some depression and it was on account of his mental state that he jumped out of the train. The Tribunal has disbelieved the version of the appellant and in my view, rightly. Kulwant Singh, on the basis of whose statement the appellant had set-up the theory of suicide, did not support his statement when he appeared as a witness before the Tribunal. As per Kulwant Singh, the police had taken his signatures on blank papers and that he never made a statement as was being attributed to him. According to him, it was on account of sudden jerking of the train that Ajit Singh fell down from the same. Having regard to the fact that the only person, on the basis of whose statement the appellant had propounded the theory of suicide, has not owned up his statement, allegedly, made by him before the FAO No.183/2010 Page 3 of 3 police, I am of the view that the Tribunal was justified in discarding his said statement and relying upon the statement as made by him before it. I find no infirmity in the order of the Tribunal. It may also be noted that the appeal is even otherwise barred by time, as it has been filed 67 days after the expiry of period of limitation. No cogent ground has been given in the application for condonation of delay except the usual explanation that it took time in processing the file for the purpose of taking a decision, whether or not to file the appeal. For the fore-going reasons, the appeal and the application are dismissed. Caveat No.128/2010 The caveator has been heard. C.M. No.8342/2010 This is an application by the appellant under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking exemption from filing certified copies of the application for compensation and the testimony of respondent No.1 before the Tribunal. The application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. REKHA SHARMA, J. MAY 05, 2010 ka