JUDGMENT

THAKKAR, J.:— Two mishaps, one, to the train by which a passenger is travelling, and another, a sympathetic one, having nexus with the former, and going arm-in-arm with it, to the passenger himself, must occur in the course of the same transaction in order to attract liability of the Railway Administration under Section 82A of the Indian Railways Act, 1890, rightly contends counsel for the Railway.

2. The High Court, in our opinion, was in error in not upholding this unexceptionable proposition and in awarding compensation to a passenger on the premise that it was not essential to establish that there was an accident to the train by which the passenger was travelling.

3. Counsel for the Railway was fair enough (we very highly appreciate this gesture) to state that it was on account of the erroneous interpretation placed by the High Court which was likely to give rise to untenable claims in future, rather than the relatively small amount awarded to the passenger, that the Railway was obliged to approach this Court by way of the present Special Leave Petition. We declined to interfere with the operative order of the High Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Art. 136 of the