BHAWANI SINGH, S.L.JAIN
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
Satish Patidar – Respondent
Jain, J. -- 1. Union of India has filed the present appeal under section 23 of the Railways Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act of 1987'), aggrieved by the award dated 12.6.1997 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhopal (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in Original Application No. 628/96. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 2 lacs as compensation to the respondents who are the legal representatives of deceased Sadashiv, who died due to a fall from a running train.
2. The final journey for the deceased began on July 14, 1992, when he boarded 130 Up train at Thandala for Meghnagar. He fell from the train and the train ran over him. The respondents, being the legal representatives of the deceased, filed the claim for compensation before the Tribunal after about 4 years of the incident, on 5.8.1996.
3. The appellant contested the claim of the respondents on the ground that the application is barred by limitation. It was also contended by the Union of India that section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989 (herein after referred to as the' Act of 1989'), providing for compensation on account of an untoward incident was inserted by Railway Amendment Act,
2. M/s. Punjab Tin Supply Co. Chandigarh v. Central Government and others = (AIR 1984 SC 87)
3. New Contractors Co. etc. v. State of Andhra Pradesh = (AIR 1976 SC 1471)
4. Mithilesh Kumari and another v. Prem Behari Khare = (AIR 1989 SC 1247)
7. Nelson Motis v. Union of India and another = (AIR 1992 SC 1981)]
8. Union of India v. Mulkobai = [2002 (2) JLJ 289, 2002 (1) MPLJ
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.