IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 7981 of 1999 For Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH ========================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the 4 interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?
5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
========================================= UNION OF INDIA Appellant(s) Versus BHAGWATIBEN SURESHBHAI PATEL & 3 Defendant(s) ========================================= Appearance :
MR RAVI KARNAVAT for Appellant(s) : 1, MR PJ MEHTA for Defendant(s) : 1 2. MR DN PANDYA for Defendant(s) : 1 2.
UNSERVEDEXPIRED (R) for Defendant(s) : 3, MR MAHESH B SHAH for Defendant(s) : 4, ========================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH Date : 11/10/2012 CAV JUDGMENT [1] By way of this appeal, the appellant – Union of India has challenged the judgment and order dated 06.08.1999 passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench in Claim Application No.0A9800058, by which the learned Tribunal has allowed the application preferred by the respondent herein for compensation.
2. Facts:
2.1 On 19.11.1997, the deceased person was travelling in Ashram Express Train No.2916 on meter gauge side of Ahmedabad Railway Station. The deceased person and his friends were travelling from Delhi to Mehsana by Ashram Express on 19.11.1997. Deceased Person Patel Sureshbhai Kanjibhai was given highly poisonous biscuits at Abu Road Station in order to rob him by making unconscious. Thereupon, Ahmedabad railway police transferred the case for further investigation to the railway police station at Abu Road. The Abu railway police recorded the complaint of Upendrabhai Patel, one of the cotravellers and offence under section 302, 328 and 394 and 114 of the IPC was registered. Therefore, respondents herein filed application for compensation before the Tribunal being Claim Application No.OA9800058. The said application was allowed by the Tribunal vide order dated 16.08.1999 and appellant herein was directed to pay Rs.4 lacs to the respondents herein within 60 days of the order, failing which interest @ 12% per annum form the date of order till realization. Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellant herein – Union of India has preferred this appeal.
3. It is submitted by Mr.Karnavat, learned advocate for the appellant that learned Tribunal has erred in not properly appreciating the evidence on record. It is submitted that alleged incident cannot be considered as violent attack in order to commit robbery or decoity and therefore, it cannot be considered as untoward incident. The Tribunal has erred in not considering the important document i.e. Exh.11 FSL report and Exh.12 PM Report. Therefore, it is requested to allow the present appeal.
4. Mr.Mehta, learned advocate for the respondents herein has submitted that judgment passed by the Tribunal is legal and not required to be interfered. Learned advocate for the respondents herein relied on the decision in the case of Union of India v/s. Aleykutty Devassia of the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam reported in 1998 ACJ 1195 in support of his submission.
5. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. This Court has perused the judgment passed by the Tribunal. It is admitted fact that deceased was travelling by Ashram Express Train No.2916 on 19.11.1997. The facts reveal from the evidence adduced by the respondents herein are that two other persons were also travelling in the same compartment and came close to all the three victims and took into confidence. Both of them said that they were going to Palanpur. All of them had tea at Abu Road Railway Station. At that time, two unknown persons who had cultivated closeness with the three victims had offered cream biscuits to the victims. After eating cream biscuits, three became unconscious and two persons who had offered cream biscuits eloped with the luggage and valuable. The contention of the learned advocate for the applicant that case cannot be considered as untoward incident is concerned, learned Tribunal has considered the said aspect and it is held by the Tribunal that since the victim died of violent attack by administration of poison, it would clearly come within the definition of 'untoward incident' and the claimants would be entitled to get compensation under section 124A. This Court is in agreement with the said finding. Further, in this regard, in the case of Union of India (supra), High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in para 6 has held as under : “6. In the present case, Celinamma was strangulated to death by one Melvin Paduva. HE was tried by the Court of sessions and found guilty of murder punishable under section 302 of Indian Penal Code. The Tribunal was pleased to extract the relevant portions of the judgment of the Sessions Court in Sessions Case No.27 of 1994 wherein the Sessions Court found Melvin Paduva guilty of causing the death of Celinamma. This is a case where Celinmma died of violent attack while she was travelling in a train. The act committed by the assailant amounts to untoward incident as defined under the Railway Act and the claimants are certainly entitled to get compensation under section 124A of the Act.”
6. Considering the evidence on record and decision of the High Court of Kerela in the case of Union of India (Supra), this Court is of the opinion that judgment passed by the Tribunal is legal and not required to be interfered with.
7. In view of above, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. Judgment dated 16.08.1999 passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench in Claim Application No.0A9800058 is confirmed.
[M.D.Shah, J.] satish