BEFORE THE RALWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL (BENGALURU BENCH AT BENGALURU)

CLAIM APPLICATION No.OA (II U)/SBC/0022/2023 DATED THIS FRIDAY THE 2st DAY OF AUGUST, 2024 CORAM:

1. Mrs. IVY CHARLES D’CRUZ, Hon’ble Member (Judicial).

2. Mr. RAVI NANDKEOLYAR, Hon’ble Member (Technical).

BETWEEN Sri Manohar @ Manohara, S/o Govindaswamy @ Govinda Bhovi, Aged about 48 Years, R/o. Sri Rampura Malligenahalli, Gaddikoppa, Koteganguru Post, Shivamogga City, Shivamogga Taluk & District, Karnataka State. :: Applicant A N D Union of India Represented by The General Manager, South Western Railway, HUBLI. :: Respondent Application under Section 16 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 read with Section 123(c) (2) and 124-A of Railways Act, 1989.

Value of Claim for Rs.8,00,000/-.

Ld., Counsel appeared:

Shri Dileep Kumar. M.V, For applicants.

Smt. Sumangala Hegde, For Respondent.

J U D G M E N T IVY CHARLES D’CRUZ, MEMBER (JUDICIAL).

1. This application is filed under Section 16 of RCT Act, 1987 read with Section 124 and 124-A of Indian Railways Act, 1989 seeking compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- from respondent railway for the injuries sustained by the applicant in an alleged untoward incident that occurred on 15.10.2022.

2. According to the applicant, on 14.10.2022, he along with wife and relatives with a valid second class Railway journey ticket bearing Nos. UOE- 51595418 and UOE-51595419 dated 14.10.2022 started their journey from KSR Bengaluru by Train No.20651 – Intercity Express to go to Shimogga. When the said train was in operation between Birur-Shivapura Railway Stations, he went to toilet and while he was washing his hands, near the doorways of the compartment, suddenly the train had jerk, he lost the balance had an accidental fall and he suffered serious crush injuries on left leg and also injuries to right leg and forehead. The Railway Officials have shifted him to Tarikere Government Hospital for treatment, where first-aid was extended to him. Thereafter, he was shifted to Sariji Hospital, Shimoga by Ambulance for better treatment. During the course of the treatment, left leg of the applicant was operated and amputated.

3. The respondent railway filed written statement disputing the claim and denying their liability to pay compensation. The respondent denied that the applicant was a bonafide passenger. Respondent also submitted that the evidence has clearly established that the applicant was found in a drunken condition. Immediately, after the incident when co-passenger and others tried to rescue him, the injured applicant started throwing stones. That itself shows the state of the condition of the applicant, therefore, the respondent railway is not liable to pay compensation

4. In support of the claim, the applicant was examined as AW-1 and Exh A-1 to Exh A-18 were marked on behalf of applicants. AW-1 was cross- examined by Respondent’s Counsel. Apart from the above, evidence-in-chief by way of affidavit of Shri Rajendra S/o. Laxmanappa, Relative of the applicant. Exh A-19, copy of Aadhaar Card was marked. AW-2 was cross- examined. Both AW-1 and AW-2 were discharged. On behalf of Respondent Railways, evidence-in-chief by way of affidavit of Shri Vikash Pandey S/o. A. Pandey, Train Manager (Sr. Goods) filed and examined as RW-1. Exh R-2 and R-3 were marked through him. RW-1 was cross-examined by Applicant’s Counsel. RW-1 was discharged.

5. Arguments from both Shri Gufran, Learned Counsel for the Applicant and Smt. Sumangala Hegde, Learned Counsel for the Respondent were heard. Ld., Counsel for the Respondent also filed their written arguments, 6. On consideration of the material available on record and contentions of Ld. Counsels of both sides, the findings on the issues are recorded as follows:

1) Whether the injured applicant was a bonafide passenger?

2) Whether the injuries sustained by the injured applicant was due to an untoward incident as is defined under the provisions of Section 123(c) of Railways Act, 1989?

3) Whether the injured applicant is applicants