IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Bharati Dangre, J.
Nitin Navindas Hundiwala – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
First Appeal No. 597 of 2017
Decided On : 12-04-2022
Railway Claims Tribunal - Compensation - Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, Sec. 16(1) and Sec. 13(1-A); Railways Act, 1989, Sec. 124-A
Fact of the Case:
The appellant sought compensation for injuries sustained in an untoward incident while boarding a train. The Tribunal rejected the claim, stating that the incident did not fall within the definition of 'untoward incident' and that the appellant was not a bonafide passenger.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the incident did fall within the definition of 'untoward incident' and that the appellant was a bonafide passenger, entitling him to compensation.
Issues: Whether the incident constituted an 'untoward incident' and whether the appellant was a bonafide passenger.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the definition of 'untoward incident' and the concept of a bonafide passenger, emphasizing that the absence of a ticket does not negate the claim of being a bonafide passenger.
Final Decision: The impugned judgment was quashed and set aside, and the appellant was awarded compensation for medical expenses and loss caused by the accident.
JUDGMENT
1. The present Appeal is filed by the appellant, being aggrieved by rejection of his Claim Application by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, vide judgment dtd. 17/7/2013. The claim being filed u/s.16(1) read with Sec. 13(1-A) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 and Sec. 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989, sought compensation to the tune of Rs. Four lakhs from the respondent Railway on account of the injuries sustained by the appellant in an untoward incident alleged to have taken place on 23/11/2011. Heard learned counsel Ms.Chaitrali Deshmukh for the appellant and Advocate Chetan Agrawal along with Nikita Banatwala for the UOI.
2. The appellant, being resident of Dahisar, Mumbai was working as a Consultant with S & S Enterprises, Mehra Estate, Vikhroli, and was earning Rs. 10, 000.00 p.m from this engagement. In order to attend his duties, he had to commute from Dahisar to Vikhroli and in his normal routine, on 23/11/2022, he left his home and reached his office and on his return, reached at Vikhroli Railway Station, in order to reach to his home at Dahisar. He got the coupons validated by inserting them in Coupon Validating Machine and boarded a local train which took him to Dadar (Central Railway Station). From there, he came to platform no.5 (Western) in order to board a train to reach Dahisar Railway Station. The claim of the appellant is that, he boarded 2nd Class General Compartment on 17.26 Fast Virar local train, which was overcrowded and on his boarding the train, he was pushed by the crowd from the compartment, and since he was standing on the edge, he lost his balance and accidentally, his right leg slipped into the gap between the train and platform and he fell down from the running train and sustained serious injuries to his head and right thigh. He was removed to the Emergency Medical Room at Platform No.6 at Dadar (Central Railway) by On-Duty Railway Police and thereafter, moved to Sion hospital. On account of the accidental fall, he sustained the following injuries:-
(i) Fracture of shaft femur segmental U/3 and L/3 (Rt.)
(ii) Injury to (Lt.) knee joint
(iii) Head Injury.
3. He was admitted in Patel Nursing Home, Andheri (East) for better treatment and remained as an indoor patient from 23/11/2011 to 6/12/2011 i.e. in total, 14 days. In his Application, the applicant specifically stated that on his medical treatment, he had to expend an amount of Rs. Two lakhs, but he had preserved the medical bills in original only to the tune of Rs. 1, 61, 098.00 and misplaced the remaining bills, but approximately, an amount of Rs. Two lakhs was spent on the treatment.
The claim projected in his application, was based on an accident, which was described as an untoward incident, which resulted in serious injuries, consequentially, posing him difficulty in long distance walk, lifting heavy things, difficulty and pain while walking as well as climbing staircase, squatting and sitting crossed legs and immense pain in winters. Pleading that the disabilities incurred by him has changed his course of life and has impacted his life forever, he claimed compensation since the incident which resulted into the injuries, is an untoward incident, as defined in Sec. 123(c)(2) of the Indian Railways Act, 1989. The application filed by the applicant made the following prayer:-
"I pray that Rs. 4, 00, 000.00 or JUST compensation may please be awarded to me along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of application till the payment as per the provisions of Indian Railway Act, 1989 ".
4. In support of his claim, he filed his affidavit in lieu of evidence on 26/3/2015, where he reiterated his claim. He also filed the medical papers, reflecting the treatment offered to him. Apart, the accident memo signed by the Personnel, GRP in respect of the accident dtd. 23/11/2011 involving the applicant, which recorded that an aged person about 70 years, was found lying on platform no.5, and his personal details as well as the injuries su
Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. Vs. The Workmen
Jameela and Ors Vs. Union of India
Jeewanlal Ltd. Vs. Appellate Authority
Kunal Singh Vs. Union of India
Lalappa Lingappa and Others Vs. Laxmi Vishnu Textile Mills Ltd.
S. M. Nilajkar Vs. Telecom Distt. Manager
The interpretation of the term 'untoward incident' and the concept of a bonafide passenger under the Railway Claims Tribunal Act and Railways Act.
The incident of falling under a moving train constituted an untoward incident, entitling the appellants to compensation under Section 124-A of the Railways Act.
Mere absence of ticket does not negate bonafide passenger status; affidavit suffices to discharge burden. Falling from running train is untoward incident under no-fault liability, entitling dependent....
Bona fide passengers holding valid tickets are entitled to compensation for accidental falls, irrespective of which train they used, under the Railways Act.
The court held that the deceased was a bona fide passenger and the incident constituted an ‘untoward incident’ under the Railways Act, thus entitling the claimants to compensation.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.