GAHC010137022018

undefined

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : MFA/87/2018

SMTI ASIEA KHATUN @ BEWA

W/O LATE ABDUL MALEK, R/O VILL. NAYAGAON, P.O. JHOWDANGA, P.S.

MANCACHAR, DIST. DHUBRI (PRESENTLY SOUTH SALMARA

MANKACHAR) ASSAM.

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA

REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, N.F. RAILWAY, MALIGAON,

GUWAHATI-11

BEFORE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI

For the petitioner : Ms. R. Choudhury ... Advocate For the respondent : Mr. G. Goswami, SC, ...NF Railway

Date of hearing & judgment : 09.01.2025

JUDGMENT AND ORDER

1. Heard Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. G. Goswami, learned Standing Counsel, NF Railway appearing for the

respondent.

2. By way of this appeal under Section 23(1) of the Railway Accident Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, the appellant is assailing the judgment and order dated 17.02.2017 passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench in Claim Application No. OAIIu/141/2012(Old)/OAIIu/GHY/2013/0001 (New).

3. The gist of the relevant facts is that the husband of the applicant/appellant Late Abdul Malek while was allegedly travelling on 13.03.2012 along with his son by one Passenger Train bearing no. 12505, the Northeast Express, he fell down from the train due to heavy rush of passengers on 14.03.2012 at 11:20 a.m. and after conduction of Post-mortem over the body, the same was handed over to the victim’s family. Thereafter, a claim petition was filed being application no. O.A.-IIu-141/2012 before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench at Guwahati (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) by the appellant claiming herself as the wife of the said deceased. The Tribunal, vide judgment dated 17.02.2017 was pleased to dismiss the said claim for lack of evidence. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of the Tribunal, the present appeal has been preferred by the appellant.

4. Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal has committed manifest error in rejecting the claim of the appellant and as such, the impugned judgment and order is required to be set aside. She further submits that the claimant has enclosed the copy of the UCO Bank Passbook, wherein the petitioner is mentioned to be the wife of the late deceased as proof of dependency, and the same being not objected by the respondent Railway, the appellant has established that she is the dependent of the said deceased. In support of the same, she relies upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Iqbal Basith and Others vs. N. Subbalakshmi &

Others, reported in (2021) 2 SCC 718. She further submits that in view of the fact that the appellant has proved that she is one of the dependent of the deceased, the Tribunal has erred in law in rejecting her claim. She further submits that though the Tribunal on 07.12.2016 had summoned the son of the appellant, however, in view of the fact that he had expired in the meantime, his evidence could not be adduced. She further submits that the Final Report submitted in the case which is exhibited as Ex-3(1) clearly establishes the fact that the alleged husband of the appellant died while travelling in the Train and as such, the initial burden as required under the law is established by the claimant.

5. Per contra, Mr. G. Goswami, learned Standing Counsel, NF Railway submits that the claimant has miserably failed to establish that she is the legal heir of the deceased by producing cogent evidence whatsoever before the Tribunal. He further submits that though the son of the deceased who is alleged to have travelled with him in the railway journey on the day of the alleged accident though was available at the time of filing evidence in the year 2015, however, the appellant chose not to bring the evidence of the said son on record by filing necessary affidavit on evidence. He further draws the attention of the Court that the appellant had filed her evidence on affidavit on 22.09.2015. He accordingly submi