Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.15 seconds)Ramesh Chandra Dutt vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 5 October, 1964
11. Ramesh v. Union of India, (AIR 1965 Pat 167), was also a case of a railway, line crossing a busy road at a point from where the in-coming train was not visible until the passerby was on the railway track itself.
Mata Prasad And Ors. vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 7 December, 1977
8. Another decision, which is also a case of a manned level crossing, relied upon by the learned counsel for the plaintiff appellant was that in Mata Prasad v. Union of India, (AIR 1978 All 303).
Smt. Imaman vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 7 August, 1975
In Imaman v. Union of India, (AIR 1976 All 85), which was not a case of a level crossing a goods train was running at a high speed. The deceased had purchased a ticket and was crossing the railway track as there was no over-bridge. The deceased was in a hurry to catch the train by which he had to travel. The driver of the goods train did not employ due care, caution and skill while driving it at a high speed and the railway staff did not issue any warning to the passengers of the approaching goods train. The facts of this case were entirely different and the decision therein has no applicability to the facts of the present case.
Daya Shankar vs B.B. And C.I. Ry. Co. on 24 April, 1931
7. The first case relied upon by the learned counsel was Daya Shankar v. B. B. and C. I. Rly. Co. (1931 All. L. J. 847). In that case the plaintiff was travelling in his car and finding the gates of level crossing open, he tried to cross the rails and while doing so the railway engine collided with his ear and broke it. It was held that the plaintiff was not guilty of contributory negligence and that he was entitled to recover damages from the Railway Company. That was a case of a manned level crossing and the decision turned on the question whether the plaintiff could be said to be guilty of contributory negligence when the gates, though provided at the level crossing, were open, and the plaintiff might have been misled into thinking that the line was safe for crossing.
1