JUDGMENT:

1. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 23 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, assailing the judgment passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench in OA II (U) No.167 of 2008 dated 21.09.2016.

2. Appellant No.1 is the applicant and respondent is the respondent in OA II (U) No.167 of 2008.

3. During pendency of the Appeal, appellant No.1 expired and his legal heirs are brought on record as appellant Nos.2 to 4.

4. Appellant No.1 has filed application under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 r/w Sections 124-A and 125 of Indian Railways Act, 1989 claiming compensation of Rs.4 Lakhs (In words it is mentioned as Two Lakhs only) arising out of an accident as untoward incident.

5. On 14.02.2007, appellant No.1-applicant No.1 went to Hyderabad for purchasing marriage articles for his close relative, after completion of his work, in return journey with a view to go to Umdanagar, he went to Kachiguda Railway Station in the night on the above said date, purchased a Passenger Train journey ticket from Kachiguda to Umdanagar and boarded Local Train No.LF-11/FU6 Passenger in a General Compartment and there was heavy rush of passengers, suddenly he slipped and fell down accidentally from the running Train between NPA Shivarampalli and Umdanagar Railway Station near Budvel Railway Station due to speed and jerks of the running Train. As a result, his right hand was cut and separated above the elbow joint, left hand got fractured, sustained severe head injury and right leg was fractured at the knee joint. In the intervening night of 14/15.02.2007, he was shifted to Osmania General Hospital and was admitted as in-patient at about 1:15 A.M. through some Railway staff and Railway Police with the help of some other public. He took treatment till 22.03.2007. Appellant No.1-applicant No.1 was aged about 24 years and he was working as an auto driver, claimed an amount of Rs.4 Lakhs (In words it is Two Lakhs only) with interest from the date of filing the petition.

6. Respondent has filed his written statement and contended that appellant No.1 – applicant No.1 is not a bonafide passenger of Local Train No.LF-11/FU-6 on 14.02.2007 since no journey ticket was found with him at the time of the alleged accident and there is no report from the Railway Guard of the said Local Train about the alleged accident or any co-passenger reported/lodged a complaint in the next hault of the train or any Alarm chain was pulled during that time. There are no direct eye-witnesses to the incident. Due inquiry has been conducted by DRM, Hyderabad Division under the provisions of Railway Passengers (Manner of Investigation of Untoward Incident) Rules, 2003, and the Inquiry Report reveals that the appellant No.1-applicant No.1 was found injured and he was in conscious state, during inquiry, he himself stated that he is a lorry driver and after his duty he purchased provisions at Katedan and as it was late in the night, he was returning to his lorry to take rest and to go to his house in the early hours. During that time he was crossing the track at L.C. Gate No.9, met with an accident with some unknown train and sustained injuries, he was shifted to Osmania Hospital, Hyderabad in 108 Ambulance and he has not expressed any doubt in the accident. Appellant No.1-applicant No.1 is put to strict proof that the alleged accident falls under Section 123 (c) or Section 124-A of Railways Act, 1989.

7. It is worth mentioning that the learned Tribunal has not framed any issues basing on the pleadings nor framed any point for consideration.

8. Appellant No.1 - applicant No.1 is examined as AW.1 and also examined AW.2 - Dr. M.A.Wahed and got marked Exs.A1 to A3. On behalf of respondent, RW.1 – A.Veeranna, SI, RPF; RW2 – Md.Raheemuddin are examined and got marked Exs.R1 and R2. The Tribunal has examined CW.1 – Zoravar Khan and got marked Ex.C1 – Case Diary.

9. The learned Tribunal taking into consideration the evidence adduced by t