✦ High Court of India · 18 Jan 2019

The High Court · 2019

Case Details

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK FAO No.833 of 2019 Damayanti Sahu and Another Appellants Ms. Deepali Mohapatra, Advocate …. -versus- Union of India, represented through its General Manager, East Coast Railway, Bhubaneswar …. Respondent

Legal Reasoning

Ms. J. Sahoo, Central Government Counsel CORAM: SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY

Decision

ORDER 11.7.2023 Order No. 08. 1. The matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Ms. D. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the claimant – Appellants and Ms. J. Sahoo, learned Central Government Counsel for Respondent – Union of India. 3. Present appeal by the claimants is directed against impugned judgment dated 18th January 2019 of the Members (Judicial & Technical), Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar Bench, Bhubaneswar passed in OA No.143 of 2016, wherein the tribunal has refused to grant any compensation by disbelieving the case of the claimants. 4. According to the claimants, the deceased namely Sibaram Sahu, aged about 25 years, travelled from Titilagarh to Kantabanji on 17th March 2016 in Vishakhapatnam-Korba-Link Express train and near Kantabanji Yard at KM No.169/15-170/0 he accidentally fell down Page 1 of 4 from the running train and died at the spot. Kantabanji GRP UD Case No.10/16 was registered, inquest held and the dead body was sent for post mortem examination. 5. Learned tribunal disbelieved the case of the claimants regarding death of the deceased in an untoward incident mainly on the ground that, the head was severed from the trunk and lying inside the track. The trunk was outside the track and the place of residence of the deceased is 200 meters away from the place of accident. Further no journey ticket was recovered from possession of the deceased. 6. The claimants have examined two witnesses on their behalf and amongst them, A.W.2 is the eye witness who has stated to have seen the deceased boarding the train at Titlagarh on the same day after purchasing a valid journey ticket. 7. The railways have examined one witness viz. R.W.1, who is a RPF personnel. They further adduced the statutory report of the DRM in support of their case. 8. The undisputed facts of the case remain that the dead body of the deceased was first noticed by the LP & Guard of Express Train No.18405 at 6.53 hours on 17th March 2016 lying in the track at KM No.169/15-170/0 at Kantabanji Railway Yard. As per the inquest report, the head was inside the track and the trunk was outside. There were other bodily injuries like amputation of right leg from knee, lacerated injury on the left leg and multiple injuries on other body parts. As per the post mortem report, in addition to severance of the head and amputation of leg, it is also noticed that there were fracture of ribs and lacerated injuries on legs. According to the opinion of post Page 2 of 4 mortem doctor the cause of death is due to fall from running train and run over by the train. 9. The evidence of A.W.2 goes to show that he along with the deceased went to Titlagarh Railway Station where the deceased boarded the Link Express for Kantabanji after purchasing journey ticket. It is categorically pleaded by the claimants that the journey ticket was lost in course of incident. Said A.W.2 in his cross- examination has stated that said train left Titlagarh at 2.10 am and the cost of ticket was Rs.20/-. 10. The admitted case remains that the dead body of the deceased was first noticed at 6.53 hours on 17th March 2016, which means that the same was found after four hours from the time of journey from Titlagarh. The nature of injuries found on the dead body of the deceased are found consistent with the story of fall from running train. It is not the case that the head was only severed without any other injury found on the dead body but according to post mortem examination report there are several other injuries including amputation, crush injury and lacerated injury on different parts of the body along with fracture of ribs. Therefore, what is held by learned tribunal that the head cannot be severed in case of fall from running train is seen without any basis and in the circumstances of the present case where multiple injuries are noticed on the dead body and it is the consistent opinion of the PM doctor that all such injuries could be possible by fall from running train, in the opinion of this court, the claimants have established their case in justifying the death of deceased in an untoward incident. It is well known that mere non- recovery of journey ticket does not disprove the contention of the Page 3 of 4 claimants regarding valid journey of the deceased in the train and his death in any untoward incident. In the circumstances of the present case, which go consistent with the contentions of claimants, the death of the deceased in an untoward incident is found established. 11. In view of the discussions made above, it is concluded that the deceased died in an untoward incident on 17th March 2016 while travelling from Titlagarh to Kantabanji in Vishakhapatnam-Korba- Link Express at Kantabanji Railway Yard. As such, the claimants, who are mother and sister of the deceased, are found entitled for compensation as per scheduled amount. 12. In the result the appeal is allowed and in terms of the principles decided in the case of Union of india Vs- Rina Devi, (2019) 3 SCC 572, the Respondent – Union of India is directed to pay compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- (four lakhs) to the claimant – Appellants along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of accident or Rs.8,00,000/-, whichever is higher, within a period of four months from today. The entire compensation amount including interest shall be disbursed in favour of all the Appellants in equal share by keeping 50% of shares fall due to each Appellant in fixed deposit in their names in any Nationalized bank, for a period of six years. 13. An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules. Judge M.K.Panda ( B.P. Routray) Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: MANAS KUMAR PANDA Designation: Senior Steno Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, Cuttack Date: 12-Jul-2023 14:51:42 Page 4 of 4

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments