THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA C.M.A.NO.527 of 2006 JUDGMENT:- 1. Heard the learned counsel on record. 2. The learned Standing Counsel for the appellant-Union of India, represented by the General Manager, South Central Railway, Secunderabad, had taken this Court through the specific ground Nos. 2 to 9 of the grounds of Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and would maintain that in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal to be allowed. 3. On the contrary, the learned counsel representing the contesting respondents would maintain that in the light of the convincing findings recorded by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, Secunderabad, this is not a fit matter to be interfered with. 4. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel on record, the following points arise for consideration in this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal:- (1) Whether the findings recorded by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, Secunderabad is to be confirmed or to be set aside in the facts and circumstances of the case? (2) If so, to what relief, the parties would be entitled to? 5. POINT NO:1- The parties hereinafter would be referred to as applicants and respondent as shown in O.A.A.No.217 of 2002 on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal, (hereinafter in short referred to as “The Tribunal” for the purpose of convenience), Secunderabad Bench, Secunderabad. 6. This application is filed by the applicants for compensation of Rs.4 lakhs on the ground that the deceased- Meka Ravi, ticket holder bearing No.18606633, Tenali to Repalle, had fallen down from the passenger train No.351, on his journey, at Chinnaravuru Railway Station and died as a result of the said untoward incident. 7. The respondent-Railways denied the same by filing written statement. 8. On the strength of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were settled:- (1) Whether the Applicants are dependents of the deceased? (2) Whether on 18.08.2002 the deceased was a bonafide passenger of the train in question? (3) Whether the death of the deceased was caused due to an untoward incident as define under Section 123 (c) of the Railways Act? (4) Relief and costs? 9. The learned Tribunal had appreciated the evidence of A.W.1 and R.W.1 and also Exs.A.1 to A.6. The learned Tribunal referred to the decisions on the point and also referred to the provisions of the Railways Act as well and ultimately, came to the conclusion that it is a fit matter where compensation can be awarded. 10. According to the eye witness, the incident had taken place while the deceased was traveling from Tenali to Repalle in train No.351 at about 7.15 hrs. The deceased had fallen at Chinnaravuru Railway Station and the two co-passengers, who were with him, could not alight there and they alighted at the next stop at Tenali and from where, they went back to the spot and when train No.451 had come to Chinnaravuru at 10 p.m, the dead body was taken to Tenali Railway Station. The facts and probabilities of the case disclose that by the time train No.351 passed through Chinnaravuru Railway Station, it was about 7.30 p.m. and due to darkness, it could not be noticed by the Guard. The train halt was hardly for two minutes, even from the version of R.W.1, so, the fall of the deceased could not be noticed by the Guard. The dead body was lying at the spot till the next return train No.451 arrived there at 10 p.m. by which time the co- passengers’ informed to the Station Master of Chinnaravuru, who gave a memo to R.W.1, train guard of Train No.451, to take the dead body up to Tenali Railway Station. These facts are not denied except stating that the fall off the deceased was not due to untoward incident. 11. Apart from this aspect of the matter, on a careful analysis of the findings recorded by the learned Tribunal at paras 4, 5, 6 and 7, this Court is thoroughly satisfied that this is not a fit matter to be interfered with. Accordingly, the findings recorded by the learned Tribunal are hereby confirmed. 12. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal shall stand dismissed. No order as to costs. _______________ P.S.NARAYANA, J Dated: 08.07.2010 bud THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA C.M.A.NO.527 of 2006 DATED: 08.07.2010