The main legal point established in the judgment is the principle that no party can lead evidence beyond its pleading, and the importance of witness testimony in establishing liability.

JUDGMENT

Ravi Ranjan, J. - I have heard parties and have perused the records of this case.

2. The decision dated 18/19.02.2014 passed by the Railway Claim Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh in case No.OA-11/246/2011, which was registered on claim petition having been filed by the appellants/claimants, is under challenge in this appeal.

3. The claim application was filed by the appellant No.l-Dharamvati Devi, seeking compensation on death of her son Manoj Kumar in the alleged railway untoward incident. According to the claimant, the deceased was going to Lakarpur, Delhi after purchasing valid train ticket from Ballabhgarh to Delhi and had boarded the train. However, when the train reached at km 1503/10-12, the deceased accidentally fell down from the train due to pull and push of passengers and received serious grievous injuries and died on the spot.

4. Respondent-railways filed written statement controverting theallegations and disputing the averments made in the claim petition. The written statement was filed pending inquiry and right was reserved to amend it at the relevant point of time, but in fact, no such amendment was made in the written statement even after completion of inquiry and after the DRM came into existence. It was also stated in the written statement that the train number has not been disclosed by the claimant and, as such, he was not a bona fide passenger and denied that he purchased the alleged railway ticket from Ballabhgarh to Delhi. Other averments were also denied.

5. The Tribunal, upon appreciation of pleadings of the parties, framed the following issues:

1. Whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger of train at the time of incident?

2. Whether the incident is covered within ambit of Section 123 (c)(2) read with Section 124-A of the Railways Act.

3. Whether the applicant(c) is/are the sole dependants of the deceased?

4. Relief.

6. The applicants led oral evidence by producing the claimant-Dharamvati Devi, mother of the deceased as AW-1. The deponent affirmed the details of the incident as per claim application. During cross-examination, she testified that she is resident of Sector-24, Ballabhgarh and there is no path way from her residence to railway station. She has further stated that her son Manoj Kumar was working as part-timer in a factory namely Ishwar Company which is nearby to her residence and, for thatreason, there was no need to cross the railway line. On the fateful day, her son left the house at 6 or 6:30 p.m. However, she neither accompanied him nor did she saw him purchasing the ticket in her presence or boarding the train or falling down from the train. She has stated that cash of Rs. 840/-and a train ticket was recovered from his pocket as was told by neighbours. She has also admitted in the cross-examination that she was not present at the time of personal search of the deceased. AW-2 Rajbir Singh also stated in detail regarding the claim in his affidavit. During cross-examination, he has stated that he was in Faridabad at the time of incident and his mother-in-law did not talk to him personally but some neighbour namely Pardeep talked to him. He has also stated that, since he was at Faridabad, he could not see the deceased falling down from the train. However, he visited the place of incident and police was present there and his mother-in-law was also with him. He has further stated that he signed the paper but he did not know what was written in it. He has also stated that his mother-in-law also signed the same. The police conducted jamatalashi in which some cash, a ticket and one card of ESI Insurance were recovered and these things were returned back after 2-3 days by the police.

7. The applicants also filed documents viz., Ex.A-1, copy of station memo dated 13.12.2010, Ex.A-2, death report No.299 dated 13.12.2010 prepared by GRP/Faridabad with sketch of site plan and brief history of the case; Ex.A-3, fard jamatalashi dated 13.12.2010 by GRP/Ballabhgarh recovering cash of