JUDGMENT :

(Through : Video Conferencing)

1. Heard, learned counsel for the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that claim application has been filed by six persons including the father and mother of the deceased, but while preferring the instant Appeal against the judgment of dismissal, relationship between the appellants herein and parents (father and mother) of the deceased strained and they are not in a position to locate the present and correct address of father and mother of the deceased who are respondent Nos.2 and 3 and thus, the matter is lingering since the year 2016.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that the instant appeal may be disposed of, as it is a benevolent legislation and the compensation amount may be disbursed to dependent keeping the amount of compensation of the father and mother of the deceased pending before the Railway so as to pay the same to those persons, but keeping the appeal pending without adjudicating the appeal on merits will certainly cause loss to the appellants without any fault on their part, as the claimants are widow, son and daughter of the deceased, namely, 1.Smt. Chhuma Devi, widow of deceased-Dilip Bauri, 2.Chandan Kumar Bauri, minor son of deceased-Dilip Bauri, 3.Seema Kumari, minor daughter of deceased-Dilip Bauri and 4. Shamali Kumari, minor daughter of deceased-Dilip Bauri [appellant Nos.2, 3 and 4 are now about to attain majority] and they are requiring money for pursuing their education and livelihood, as such, the appeal may be heard on merits so as to adjudicate the issue.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection on this proposal and in case the appeal is allowed, the proportionate share of Awarded money of dependents (father and mother) shall be retained by the Railway for disbursement to the father and mother of deceased.

5. On the consent of the parties, the appeal is being heard on merits.

6. The appeal has been preferred by the appellants against the order/judgment dated 25.05.2016 passed in Case No.OA(IIU)/RNC/2015/0028 whereby the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Ranchi Bench, Ranchi has dismissed the claim application under Section 123(c)(2) read with Section 124A of Railways (Amendment) Act, 1994.

7. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that claim application has been dismissed by the learned Tribunal on the erroneous finding contrary to the material brought on record. The deceased was travelling with journey ticket upto Kharkhari Railway Station, but he has no journey ticket beyond Kharkhari Railway Station and the deadbody was found near Khario Fatak Halt next station, as such, the learned Tribunal has erroneously did not consider the deceased to be a bona-fide passenger.

8. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that because of heavy pressure and crowd, the deceased who was a bona-fide passenger and was travelling from Talgaria to Kharkhari by Chakradharpur-Gomoh Passenger on 06.04.2014 with ticket could not get down at Kharkhari Railway Station and deceased (Dilip Bauri ) was forced to continue on the Rail and unfortunate incident took place near Khario Fatak Halt.

9. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted that because of heavy pressure, the person could not get down at the destination, but admittedly he fell down near the next Railway station where the train has to stop.

10. No contrary evidence has been brought on record by the Railway to show that deceased was not having a valid ticket, in view of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Union of India vs. Rina Devi, reported in (2019) 3 SCC 572 at para 29, which is quoted hereunder:-

“29. However, mere absence of ticket with such injured or deceased will not negative the claim that he was a bona fide passenger. Initial burden will be on the claimant which can be discharged by filing an affidavit of the relevant facts and burden will then shift on the Railways and the issue can be decided on the facts sho