Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 511 (GAU)

Rameswari Devi v. Union of India

2014-05-09

K.SREEDHAR RAO

body2014
1. Heard Sri D.C. Kath Hazarika, counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. B. Devi, counsel for the NF Railway, appearing on behalf of the respondent. 2. One Ranjan Narzary, who was travelling along with his sister-in-law by the 769 up Passenger train from Khairabari to Udalguri by on 15.9.2009. The said Ranjan Narzary accidently fell down from the train and died. The mother has filed the petition seeking compensation. The Tribunal has found that the death of Ranjan Narzary was on account of accident as defined under the Railways Act, but dismissed the claim petition on the ground that there is no material to show that the claimant/ mother is the dependent and she is eligible to seek compensation under section 123 of the Railways Act, 1989. The provisions of section 123(b) are extracted below : "123. (b) "dependent" means any of the following relatives of deceased passenger, namely: (i) the wife, husband, son and daughter, and in case the deceased passenger is unmarried or is a minor, his parent; (ii) the parent, minor brother or unmarried sister, widowed sister, widowed daughter-in-law and a minor child of a pre-deceased son, if dependent wholly or partly on the deceased passenger; (iii) a minor child of a pre-deceased daughter, if wholly dependent on the deceased passenger; (iv) the paternal grandparent wholly dependant on the deceased passenger." 3. In the instant case there is no evidence that the claimant is dependent and also that the deceased is a bachelor. There is no material either to suggest that the deceased was unmarried and accordingly dismissed the petition, hence, this appeal. 4. The counsel for the appellant submits that the deposition of the claimant discloses that she is the mother of the deceased and that she is a house wife. The certificate issued by the village head Gaonburah, marked as ext.A6 discloses that claimant Smt. Rameswari Devi is the mother of the deceased and that she is dependent upon her son Ranjan Narzary, who died in the accident. Another certificate of the Village Head, marked as ext. The certificate issued by the village head Gaonburah, marked as ext.A6 discloses that claimant Smt. Rameswari Devi is the mother of the deceased and that she is dependent upon her son Ranjan Narzary, who died in the accident. Another certificate of the Village Head, marked as ext. A7 is also produced wherein it is said that the deceased was a bachelor, it may be that in the pleadings and in the claim petition there may not be mention, however, in the evidence produced and certificate marked, there is clear mention that the claimant is a widow and dependent on her deceased son and also her deceased son was a bachelor. There is no counter evidence produced by the Railway to rebut the veracity of the said documents whatsoever produced. It may be that the person, who has issued the certification has not been examined, however, strict rules of Evidence do not apply there is no ground to disbelieve the contents of the certificate and the oral evidence of the claimant. 5. In" view of the decision of this court in Union of India v. Hem Lata Mudoi, 2002 (3) GLT 729 and the facts of the present case clearly disclose that the death of Ranjan Narzary is an accidental within the meaning of section 124A of the Railway Act, 1989. 6. In that view of the matter, the order of the Tribunal is bad in law, the same is set aside. The appeal is allowed. The claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 4,00,000 as per Schedule III with interest @ 6% per annum from the dajte of petition till payment. The compensation shall be payable to the claimant by the Railway.