IMPORTANT POINT
The absence of a ticket does not negate the status of a bona fide passenger under the Railways Act, and injuries sustained while boarding a train constitute an 'untoward incident' entitling the victim's family to compensation.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties.

2. By this appeal, the applicants-original claimants have challenged the judgment and award dtd. 2/7/2019 passed by the learned Member of Railway Claims Tribunal at Nagpur (for short, "Tribunal") in Case No.OA(llu)/NGP/265/2017, whereby the Tribunal rejected the claim of the claimants.

3. The facts, giving rise to filing of the present appeal, can be summarized as under :

3.1 On 23/5/2017, the deceased Sanjay Wamanrao Wankhade obtained the ticket to travel from Warora to Wardha by train No.22128 Anandvan Express. While boarding in the train at Warora Station, he fell down from the train at the end of platform No.3 and sustained serious multiple injuries and during his treatment he died. Thus, as per the contention of the claimants, the death of the deceased was caused in an untoward incident, while boarding in the train. The claimants are the wife and two children of the deceased. As the death of the deceased was caused in an untoward incident, they are entitled to receive the compensation.

3.2 In response to the notice, the Railway Administration resisted the claim of the claimants on the ground that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger, as no ticket was found on his person. Secondly, it is the contention of the Railway that the deceased was dashed by the goods train and the said incident was witnessed by Shri Sagar Namdeo Uikey, who was working as RPF Constable at Warora Station. Thus, the death of the deceased was not caused in an untoward incident, but the death of the deceased caused as deceased was negligent and was crossing the track, at the time when one goods train arrived at platform No.3 and dashed against the deceased. Due to the said dash, the death of the deceased is caused. Thus, the death of the deceased is not in an untoward incident, but it is caused due to his own negligence, and therefore, the Railway Administration is not liable to pay the compensation to the claimants.

4. To substantiate the contention on behalf of the claimants, claimant No.2 Kaustubh Sanjay Wankhade stepped into the Witness Box vide Exh-A-69 and narrated about the incident. Besides his oral evidence, he placed reliance on the Police papers, murg report and Spot panchanama etc. as well as the Investigation report carried out by the Railway Administration. The communication by the Railway Administration at Exh-A-38 immediately after the incident dtd. 23/5/2017 by the G.R.P. Ballarshah to Police Inspector, Chandrapur City Police Station. On the basis of said evidence, the claimants claimed that the death of the deceased is caused in an untoward incident, and therefore, the Railway Administration is liable to pay the compensation.

5. Per contra, the Railway Administration adduced the evidence of Sanjay Namdeo Awari, Pointsman, Warora and Shri Sagar Namdeo Uikey, RPF Constable, Warora to prove that the death of the deceased is not caused while boarding in the train, but it is caused due to the dash by the goods train when the deceased was crossing the track. Thus, as per the contention of the Railway Administration, the alleged incident has taken place due to the negligent act of the deceased himself, and therefore, Railway Administration is not liable to pay the compensation.

6. Heard learned Advocate Mr Bagul for the applicants. He reiterated the contentions and submitted that the deceased died in an untoward incident while he was travelling by Anandvan Express. He obtained the ticket to travel by the Anandvan Express and was boarding in the train. While boarding in the train, he slipped and fell down due to the jerk to the train and sustained injury. He was immediately shifted to the hospital, but he succumbed to the death. Thus, death of the deceased is caused in an untoward incident, therefore, claimants are entitled to receive the compensation. He further stated that so far as the issue regarding the valid ticket is concerned, mere absence of the ticket is not sufficien