APHC010227482016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3333]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1014/2016 Between:

1. A . NAGAMANI, E.G.DIST & FOUR OTHERS, W/O LATE A. CHAKRAM, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS. OCC: COFFEE HOTEL NEAR RAILWAY STATION, ANJIREDDY BUILDING, ANAPARTHY POST AND MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT

2. A . RAMAKRISHNA, S/O. LATE A. CHAKRAM, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS.

OCC: COFFEE HOTEL NEAR RAILWAY STATION, ANJIREDDY BUILDING, ANAPARTHY POST AND MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT

3. A . PEDAKAPU, S/O LATE A. CHAKRAM, AGED 20 YEARS, OCC:

COFFEE HOTEL NEAR RAILWAY STATION, ANJIREDDY BUILDING, ANAPARTHY POST AND MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT

4. G . SURYAVATHI, W/O LATE A. CHAKRAM, AGED 25 YEARS. OCC :

LABOUR NEAR RAILWAY STATION, ANJIREDDY BUILDING, ANAPARTHY POST AND MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT

5. P . SATYAVENI, W/O P. KRISHNAMURTHY, AGED 19 YEARS. OCC:

LABOUR NEAR RAILWAY STATION, ANJIREDDY BUILDING.

ANAPARTHY POST AND MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT ...APPELLANT(S)

AND

1. U NIOR OF INDIA SECUNDERABAD, REP. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY. SECUNDERABAD.

...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant(S):

1. N.S.GEETHA MADHURI Counsel for the Respondent:

1. VENNA HEMANTH KUMAR(CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COUNSEL)

The Court made the following:

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1014/2016

JUDGMENT:

Aggrieved by the dismissal order passed by The Railway Claims Tribunal, Amaravati Bench, at Guntur (in short „the learned Tribunal‟) in O.A II (U) No.227 of 2006, dated 17.10.2016 the Applicants have preferred the present Appeal.

2. The brief facts of the claim application of the applicants before the Tribunal are that one Mr. Amaradi Chakram (hereinafter referred to as „the deceased‟) the deceased along with his wife Mrs.A.Nagamani and their relative D.Chandravathi came to Samalkot railway station in the early hours of 06.04.2006 at 4.20 A.M., purchased a combined passenger train journey ticket from Samalkot to Anapati bearing No.80999814 for all the three of them, boarded Train No.432 Kakinada – Vijayawada Fast Passenger in a General Compartment. While he was traveling from Samalkot to Anapati, the deceased slipped and fell down accidentally from the said running Train at K.M.No.610/39- 37 in the yard of Bikkavole railway station, he was dragged by the said train and sustained severe multiple crush and severe injuries and died on the spot. The deceased was a bonafide passenger and had died on account of an untoward incident. As such, the Applicants filed claim petition.

3. The Respondent filed Written Statement by denying their liability to pay compensation and further contending that the deceased was not a bonafide passenger of the train in question as no ticket was found from person of deceased and the death of the deceased was not on account of any untoward incident, as alleged. It is further stated that there was no report of any such incident to the Guard or any railway officials and that the dead body was found only with lungi without shirt and the body was found beheaded and the enquiries caused had revealed that the deceased was a heart patient and committed suicide.

4. Basing on the above pleadings, the following issues have been framed by the tribunal for trial -

1) Whether the applicants are dependents of the deceased?

2) Whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger of train No.432 Kakinada -

Vijayawada Fast Passenger travelling from Samalkot to Anaparti on

06.04.2006?

3) Whether the deceased died as a result of an untoward incident of accidental fall from the said train? 4) To what relief?

5. Applicant No.1- A.Nagamani got examined herself as AW.1 and also got marked Ex.A1 to A5 documents on behalf of the Applicants. On behalf of Respondent, RW.1 and RW.2 were examined and got marked Ex.R1 to R4 documents on behalf of Respondent.

6. The learned Tribunal after hearing on both