SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1952 Supreme(Pat) 50

PATNA HIGH COURT
S.K.Das and V.Ramaswami JJ.
Shreenath Singh
Versus
East Indian Rly.Administration
Appeal From Original Order No. 329 of 1951 ; 330 of 1951 ;
Decided On : APRIL 02, 1952

The Railway Accidents (Compensation) Rules, 1950, are not inconsistent with Section 82A of the Indian Railways Act and provide for compensation for permanent total disablement and permanent partial disablement only.

Headnote:

RAILWAYS ACT - COMPENSATION - SECTION 82A, 82J - RULES MADE UNDER SECTION 82J - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION - RULES NOT INCONSISTENT WITH SECTION 82A - RULES PROVIDE FOR COMPENSATION FOR PERMANENT TOTAL DISABLEMENT AND PERMANENT PARTIAL DISABLEMENT ONLY - NO PROVISION FOR TEMPORARY TOTAL DISABLEMENT OR TEMPORARY PARTIAL DISABLEMENT - CLAIMANTS ENTITLED TO COMPENSATION ON BASIS OF PERMANENT PARTIAL DISABLEMENT CAUSING LOSS OF EARNING CAPACITY - NO ERROR IN CALCULATION OF COMPENSATION FOR SRI T.R. BHATIA - MISTAKE OF CALCULATION OF RS. 72 ONLY IN CASE OF SRI SREENATH SINGH - APPEAL OF SRI SREENATH SINGH ALLOWED TO LIMITED EXTENT - APPEAL OF SRI T.R. BHATIA DISMISSED.

Fact of the Case:

Two appellants, Sri Sreenath Singh and Sri T.R. Bhatia, were injured in a train accident and claimed compensation under Section 82A of the Indian Railways Act. The Claims Commissioner applied Rule 6 of the Railway Accidents (Compensation) Rules, 1950, and awarded compensation for partial disablement causing permanent loss of earning capacity.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the Railway Accidents (Compensation) Rules, 1950, were not inconsistent with Section 82A of the Indian Railways Act and provided for compensation for permanent total disablement and permanent partial disablement only. The court found no error in the calculation of compensation for Sri T.R. Bhatia, but there was a mistake of calculation of Rs. 72 only in the case of Sri Sreenath Singh.

Issues: 1. Whether the Railway Accidents (Compensation) Rules, 1950, were inconsistent with Section 82A of the Indian Railways Act? 2. Whether the rules provided for compensation for temporary total disablement or temporary partial disablement? 3. Whether there was any error in the calculation of compensation for Sri T.R. Bhatia and Sri Sreenath Singh?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the Railway Accidents (Compensation) Rules, 1950, were not inconsistent with Section 82A of the Indian Railways Act because they were made in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 82J of the Act and were within the scope and object of Section 82A. 2. The court held that the rules provided for compensation for permanent total disablement and permanent partial disablement only, and there was no provision for temporary total disablement or temporary partial disablement. 3. The court found no error in the calculation of compensation for Sri T.R. Bhatia, but there was a mistake of calculation of Rs. 72 only in the case of Sri Sreenath Singh.

Final Decision: The appeal of Sri Sreenath Singh was allowed to the limited extent of correcting the mistake of calculation of Rs. 72, and the appeal of Sri T.R. Bhatia was dismissed.

Judgment

Das, J.

1. These are two appeals under Section 82F(2) of the Indian Railways Act from an order of the Claims Commissioner dated the 18th of August 1951, and the principal point for consideration is the amount of compensation to which the appellants are entitled by reason of the provisions of Section 82A and the rules made under Sec.32J of the Indian Railways Act. In Miscellaneous Appeal No. 329 of 1950, the appellant, who was the claimant before the Claims Commissioner, is Sri Sreenath Singh, an advocate of this Court. The appellant in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 330 of 1951, who was the claimant before the learned. Claims Commissioner, is Sri T.R. Bhatia. Both these gentlemen were travelling by the 7 Up Toofan Express on the 13th of August 1950, This train met with an accident near Karamnasa, and as a result of the accident, the appellants sustained severe personal injuries and lost their personal effects. Both of them were first removed to Mogalsarai by a relief train, then to the hospital at Benares & ultimately to the Patna General Hospital. At the Patna General Hospital, they were indoor patients for some months; and their case before the Claims Commissioner was that they were still suffering from the effects of the personal injuries sustained by them in the accident.

2. The questions raised in the two appeals are principally questions of law bearing on the amount of compensation payable to the appellants. Therefore, it is unnecessary to give details of the injuries sustained by the appellants. It is, however, necessary to indicate how the Claims Commissioner proceeded to consider and decide the claims preferred by the two appellants. Section 82A (I am reading only the relevant portion) lays down that, when in the course of working a railway an accident occurs, whether or not there has been any wrongful act, neglect or default on the part of the Railway Administration such as would entitle a person who has been injured or has suffered loss to maintain an action and recover damages in respect thereof, the Railway Administration shall, notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, be liable to pay compensation to the extent set out in Sub-section (2) and to that extent only for loss occasioned by the death of a passenger dying as a result of such accident, and for personal injury and loss, destruction or deterioration of goods owned by the passenger and accompanying the passenger in his compartment or on the train, sustained as a result of such accident. Sub-section (2) states that the liability of a railway administration shall in no case exceed ten thousand rupees in respect of any one person.

Section 82A was inserted by Sec.2 of the Indian Railways (Amendment) Act, III of 1942. In 1949, further amendments were made by the Indian Railways (Amendment) Act, LVI of 1949. Sections 82B to 82J were added. These sections related to the appointment of Claims Commissioners, application for compensation, procedure and powers of Claims Commissioners, interim orders for compensation, liability to pay compensation etc. to be decided by the Claims Commissioners, and appeals from their orders etc. Section 82H saved the right of any person to recover compensation payable under the Workmens Compensation Act, 1923 or any other law for the time being in force or under any contract or scheme providing for payment of compensation etc. Section 82J is important, and I propose to read it in full: "(1) The Central Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, make rules to carry out the objects of Sections 82A to 82H inclusive.

(2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide for- (i) the qualifications and conditions of service of Claims Commissioners:

(ii) the nature of the injury for which and the rates at which compensation shall be payable;

(iii) the rates at which compensation shall be payable for death or total disablement;

(iv) the manner in which claim
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top