IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.9649/2017 (RCT) BETWEEN:
THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY HUBLI – 580 020 … APPELLANT (BY SRI N.S.SANJAY GOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SMT. G.E.ASHA WIFE OF LATE M.S.RAVIKUMAR 41 YEARS 2. KUM.AR ANUSHRI DAUGHTER OF LATE MS.RAVIKUMAR 20 YEARS 3. KUM. AR BINDUSHRI @ R. BHUVANA DAUGHTER OF LATE MS RAVIKUMAR 17 YEARS MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER THE 1ST RESPONDENT 4. SMT. SUNDARAMMA WIFE OF LATE B SHIVANNA 69 YEARS ALL THE RESPONDENTS ARE RESIDING AT BASAVESHARA NILAYA GEETHA MANDIRA EXTENSION IJOOR, WARD NO.26 RAMANAGARA – 562 159 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K.G.SHANTHARAJA, ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 23(1) OF RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.03.2017 PASSED IN OA II U 56/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.8,00,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% FROM THE DATE OF FILING APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF AWARD AND THEREAFTER 9% P.A. TILL THE DATE OF ACTUAL PAYMENT.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T 1. Heard the appellant’s counsel and the respondents’ counsel.
2. The appellant has challenged the judgment dated 10.03.2017 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bangalore Bench,in OA II U 56/2014. The claimants before the Tribunal are the LRs. of the deceased namely, M.S.Ravikumar who used to commute everyday from Ramanagara to Bangalore and back holding a railway season ticket. On 03.03.2014, while boarding train No.76508 at Platform No.1 of Cantonment Railway Station at about 17.45 hours, he fell down from the train as it was overcrowded and sustained severe injuries. He succumbed to the injuries in the hospital. The appellant being the respondent before the Tribunal took up a contention that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger and that he fell down from a train while attempting to board empty rake of the moving train. No ticket is issued to travel by empty rakes and none is allowed to board empty rakes.
3. The Tribunal, after appreciating the evidence, has come to conclusion that the deceased was a bona fide passenger in spite of noticing the report as per Ex.R1 that the injured person tried to board the empty rake of the moving train. To come to this conclusion, the Tribunal has relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Jameela vs. Union of India reported in 2010 ACJ 2453 (SC) and in the case of Union of India vs. Prabhakaran Vijaya Kumar & Others reported in 2008 Kart M.A.C.545 (SC). This shows that the Tribunal has applied its mind while holding that the deceased was a bona fide passenger. I find no infirmity in the findings given by the Tribunal. The appeal is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed.
SD/- JUDGE hkh.