FAO No.1331 of 2010 (O&M) - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** FAO No.1331 of 2010 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 19.05.2010 **** Union of India through General Manager, Northern Railway, New Delhi. . . . . Appellant VS. Jai Parkash and another . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN **** Present: - Mr.Amit Kumar, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.G.C. Shahpuri, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2. **** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN J. (ORAL) This appeal is directed against the order of Railway Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for short ‘the Tribunal) dated 25.9.2009 by which the claimants have been awarded a sum of Rs.4 lacs to be equally shared by both the claimants/respondents with 6% simple interest per annum from the date of filing of the claim application i.e. 1.11.2006 till 25.9.2009 and further interest @ 9% per annum from 26.9.2009 till the payment is made. The only argument raised by learned counsel for the appellant is that the deceased was not the bonafide passenger as he was not carrying the traveling ticket of 3.3.2006 rather on jamatalashi ticket dated 4.3.2006 was found which was alleged to have been planted later on. This argument has already FAO No.1331 of 2010 (O&M) - 2 - been dealt with learned Tribunal in detail at various places in the impugned order, which reads as under: - “Ticket No.69214 and ticket No.65123 were recovered during jamatalashi of deceased. Tickets were ex. Bahadurgarh to Jind and together these made entitlement to undertake journey by train no.2137 M/E sitting class. Respondent has admitted having issued these tickets but for 04.03.2006 in 00-6 m shift. While deceased started journey ex. Bahadurgarh on 03.03.2006, he could not have possessed these trains and hence tickets were planted in the case of claim compensation. In support respondent has filed DRM report-relevant portion for inquiry on tickets. The bench would go into as to whether there could be planting of tickets – dead body lying in the railway precincts was first notices by a key-man of railways who reported to Station master and who issued station memo on 04.03.2006 at 7.37 am to GRP Rohtak and others. GRP Rohtak, informed family members of deceased at about 9 am which is seen to be reasonably fast communication. On receiving this information, father of deceased and other reached the site. In the meantime, two railway staff (gangmen) were keeping vigil on person of deceased and hence any tempering with the site was not possible. The alleged tickets were sold during 00-6 am shift. By 6.00 am, this incident of death of the deceased was neither noticed by railway nor notified by GRP nor was father of the deceased informed. Thereby, getting tickets purchased during this time slot for planting is not considered feasible. Incident took place between two railway stations and making use of used tickets (collected at Jind Station) also does not seem realistic as used tickets after collection were FAO No.1331 of 2010 (O&M) - 3 - in the custody of railway station, Jind. Further Jamatalashi was conducted in the presence of both gangmen of railways who would have reported the matter to railway authority, if tampering with the recovered items had been attempted. It is no situation like this. Railway administration has not filed evidence of two gangmen to prove version. Thereby, it is observed that tickets were recovered in jamatalashi which were not invalid and acceptable. These tickets were used by deceased for journey. The respondent has contended that tickets recovered in jamatalashi (on which deceased had travelled as established aforesaid) were issued on 04.03.2006 in 00-06.00 am shift. Thereby, these tickets were not valid for journey on 03.03.2006 by deceased. The bench has considered the position between the two parties. Deceased approached the railway station Bahadurgarh on 03.03.2006 for tickets (s) for Jind. He was issued two tickets together entitled for journey by 2137 M/E train sitting class. It was not possibly checked by him before leaving the window whether tickets were not dated 03.03.2006. Therefore, if railway station had issued tickets for 04.03.2006 erroneously or otherwise, it went unnoticed by passenger. It was late night time for the journey to start from Bahadurgarh (Arr.22.45 Dep. 22.48 as per DRM report). Respondent has claimed that these tickets were issued dated 04.03.2006 shift 00-6.00 am Certificate by booking Supervisor not found enclosed in DRM report. Respondent has also not filed evidence of concerned booking personnel who issued the tickets to testify the date / time of issue. In absence of such evidence, the bench is inclined to draw inference that either tickets were dated FAO No.1331 of 2010 (O&M) - 4 - 03.03.2006 or these were erroneously dated 04.03.2006 or dated 04.03.2006 after closing of shift upto 00.024 hours, somewhat earlier and for all this deceased was not responsible.” After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, I do not find any error in the aforesaid findings recorded by the Tribunal nor learned counsel for the appellant could point out any defect during the course of his arguments. In view of the above discussion, appeal is found to be without any merit and as such the same is hereby dismissed however without any order as to costs. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) 19.05.2010 JUDGE Vivek