Allahabad High Court
Mohammad Yusuf vs Union Of India on 12 December, 2019
Author: Jaspreet Singh
Bench: Jaspreet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 6 Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 172 of 1996 Appellant :- Mohammad Yusuf Respondent :- Union of India Counsel for Appellant :- R.C.Awasthi,S.P. Mishra,Sachin Dixit Counsel for Respondent :- Pankaj Srivastava Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
Heard the learned counsel for the appellant Shri S. P. Mishra. None appears for the respondent.
This Court noticing that the appeal is of the year 1996 had passed the following order on 05.12.2019 which reads as under:-
"The appeal is of the year 1996, however, by means of the order dated 30.10.2019, this Matter has been directed to be listed before the Single Judge, accordingly, this matter is listed today before this Court.
None appears for either of the parties, however, in the interest of justice the matter is adjourned today.
List this matter peremptorily in the next week on which date the matter shall not be adjourned. In case either of the parties do not appear, the Court shall pass appropriate order."
Today Shri S.P. Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant has informed the Court that in another appeal bearing FAFO No.173 of 1996, Mohammad Yusuf Vs. Union of India, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court by means of order dated 06.10.2016 passed in FAFO No.173 of 1996 has been pleased to allow the FAFO. Since the same points of fact and law are also involved in the instant appeal which also arises out of the same accident; inasmuch as in an accident on 20.08.1995 on account of collision between two trains, namely, Kalindi Exp. and Purushottam Exp., four persons expired, namely, Mohd. Ayub, Kahkashan and two minor children, namely, Mahfooz Alam and Mansoor Alam. The appellant being the grant father had preferred four claim petitions which were dismissed.
Be that as it may, four FAFOs were filed out of which FAFO NO.173 of 1996 which relates to the compensation in respect of death of the minor children Maahfooz Alam has been allowed by the court whereas the instant appeal relates to the other minor son, namely, Mansoor Alam. A copy of the judgment passed by this Court dated 06.10.2016 has also been produced before the Court alongwith another order dated 26.10.2015 whereby a Division Bench of this Court had earlier directed the instant FAFO to be connected with FAFO No.172 of 1996. Since the instant FAFO could not be connected with the FAFO No.173 of 1996, accordingly it remained to be decided.
The Court has considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant. Since none has appeared for the respondent, accordingly the Court has heard the learned counsel for the appellant and finds that the facts as well as the question of law involved in the instant FAFO has already been answered by this Court in FAFO No.173 of 1996.
Accordingly, this appeal shall also stands decided in light of the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench dated 06.10.2016 in FAFO No.173 of 1996 only with a slight modification that the amount as payable as directed to be paid to the appellant shall be made applicable in the instant appellant from the date of this order.
Office is directed to issue a certified copy of the order passed by this Court alongwith the order passed in FAFO No.173 of 1996 on payment of usual charges.
With the aforesaid, the appeal stands decided.
Order Date :- 12.12.2019 ank