Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

may 2025

Delhi High Court · 2025-05-06

CHANDER SHEKHAR & ANR vs UNION OF INDIA

Citation / case number
FAO-120/2020 2025:DHC:3411
Court
Delhi High Court
Petitioner
CHANDER SHEKHAR & ANR
Respondent
UNION OF INDIA

Judgment text excerpt

$~22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 06th May, 2025 + FAO 120/2020 CHANDER SHEKHAR & ANR .....Appellants Through: Mr. Rajan Sood, Ms. Ashima Sood and Ms. Megha Sood, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMESH SHARMA DHARMESH SHARMA, J. (ORAL) 1. No one appears for the respondent when the matter was called. 2. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and on perusal of the record, this Court proceeds to decide the present appeal instituted by the appellants/claimants under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 [‘RCT Act’] seeking quashing of the impugned judgment-cum-award dated 31.10.2018 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Railway Claims Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi [‘RCT’], whereby their claim for statutory compensation on account of death of their son/Pankaj was dismissed. 3. In a nutshell, it was the case of the claimants that their deceased son Pankaj, was travelling by Gomti Express on 01.11.2016 from Shikohabad to New Delhi on a valid journey ticket bearing No. 10322307 dated 31.10.2016 and when the said train was passing Signature Not Verified FAO 120/2020 Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD Page 1 of 9 KUMAR VATS Signing Date:07.05.2025 17:51:22 Ghaziabad Railway Station, he came near the gate of the train compartment and accidently fell down from the moving train, as a result of which he sustained grievous injuries all over his body. It was claimed that though some public-spirited person got him admitted in Ambay Hospital, Ghaziabad, but his condition deteriorated and subsequently he was referred to GTB Hospital, Delhi where he succumbed to injuries sustained in the accident. Hence, they claim compensation from the respondent. 4. The respondent c

CHANDER SHEKHAR & ANR vs UNION OF INDIA · Niyam