Vivek Agarwal, J.

1. This appeal is filed by the Union of India under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act 1987 challenging the judgment dated 16 September, 2016 passed in O.A IIu/BPL/2012/0425 on the ground that case of the claimant will fall under the provisions of Section 124-A of the Railways Act 1989.

2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that since the deceased was trying to board a running train, therefore, the act of the claimant will come under the definition of self-inflicted injury as defined in Clause (b) under the proviso below Section 124-A which is sufficient to exonerate the railway administration of its liability to pay the compensation.

3. Taking this argument, it is submitted that it is a fit case to quash the award.

4. Learned counsel for respondent no. 1 supports the award and submits that no evidence is led by the Railway Administration to prove either the D.R.M. report to substantiate that the deceased was trying to board a running train. He being a bonafide passenger is not disputed by the Railway Administration and, therefore, merely saying that he was trying to board the running train so to absolve himself of its liability showing that it is a case of self-inflicted injury which is not sufficient.

5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, it is evident that while discussing the issues Nos. 1, 2 and 3, the learned Tribunal has also accepted this fact that unless the evidence is led in the hands of the eye-witnesses or other circumstantial evidence which is produced to show that claimant was negligent in boarding the running train resulting in untoward incident, no indulgence can be shown in the matter. When tested on this ground, then impugned award cannot be faulted with.

6. The Railway Administration cannot take advantage of its own mistake by not examining the best witness in support of their case. The submission which is not proved cannot be said to be a relevant piece of evidence to be taken into consideration by a judicial forum to decide a case. Admittedly, since no evidence is led, the appeal deserves to be dismissed and is dismissed.

7. Record of the Tribunal be sent back.