Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 929 (GAU)

Bhadra Das v. Union Of India

2019-08-26

ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

body2019
JUDGMENT : Achintya Malla Bujor Barua, J. Heard Ms. S.P. Das, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned counsel for the respondent Railway Authorities. 2. We express our dissatisfaction on the manner in which the appeal had been conducted on behalf of the appellant to the extent that it being an appeal of the year 2005, the matter was not pursued in the true earnest for it to be taken earlier. 3. The appeal is against an order dated 21.03.2005 of the Railway Claims Tribunal in application No. OA. M-28/02 whereby, the application for condonation of the delay filed by the applicant was rejected. 4. The Court is unable to convince itself as to why this appeal was not urged upon to be heard at an earlier date as it neither required the LCR nor it required any complicated argument to present the case of the appellant. 5. Be that as it may, upon perusing the order dated 21.03.2005, we take note of that the delay of 4 months and 14 days in preferring the claim was rejected as because the appellant/applicant along with their claim petition had filed only the post mortem report and the report of the government railway police station. The claim tribunal was of the view that as the journey ticket was not enclosed which would have made the deceased a bonafide railway passenger, the delay is not required to be condoned. 6. We are unable to accept the reasoning of the tribunal, and are of the view that it is for the claimant to prove the through evidence in course of the proceeding that the deceased was a bonafide railway passenger and for the purpose there is no requirement under the law that the ticket itself has to be enclosed along with the application. 7. This issue had also been decided by the Andhra Pradesh High Court to the extent that even if the ticket is not found with the deceased, the same by itself would not be a reason to discard the claim that the deceased is a bonafide railway passenger. 8. In view of the above, the order dated 21.03.2005 in application No. OA.M-28/02 rejecting the application for condoning the delay stands set aside. 9. 8. In view of the above, the order dated 21.03.2005 in application No. OA.M-28/02 rejecting the application for condoning the delay stands set aside. 9. The matter is remanded back to the Railway Claims Tribunal to decide the condonation application on its own merit by applying the law relating to condoning the delay. If the delay is condonable, the claim petition be heard on its own merit by allowing the claimant to produce the relevant evidence. The appeal stands allowed to the extent as indicated above. Send back the LCR.