Injuries sustained while boarding or de-boarding a train qualify as an 'untoward incident' under the no fault theory, irrespective of any passenger negligence.

Headnote:(A) Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 - Section 23 and Section 123(c) - Appeal against dismissal of claim application for compensation - Tribunal held the deceased, a bona fide passenger, but ruled incident not an ‘untoward incident’ due to negligence - Court counters this, stating injuries during boarding/de-boarding constitute ‘untoward incident’ under no fault theory - Matter remanded for compensation assessment. (Paras 1, 8, 10, 12)

(B) Liability - No fault theory - Concept does not allow for contributory negligence to negate claims for accidents occurring while boarding or de-boarding trains. (Para 9)

Facts of the case:
The appellants claimed compensation for the death of Smt. Krishna Devi, who suffered injuries upon falling from a train due to a sudden jerk while alighting and later succumbed to her injuries. The Tribunal dismissed the claim stating the incident was not an untoward incident due to alleged passenger negligence. (Paras 5, 8)

Findings of Court:
The deceased was recognized as a bona fide passenger and the incident considered an untoward incident, warranting compensation. The Tribunal's dismissal was incorrect and hence, the case was remanded for appropriate compensation. (Paras 10, 11)

Issues: Whether the incident constituted an 'untoward incident' as defined under relevant Act provisions, and the implications of alleged passenger negligence. (Paras 2, 8)

Ratio Decidendi: The ruling clarified that injuries occurring in the course of boarding or de-boarding a train qualify as untoward incidents, and the argument of victim negligence cannot negate liability under the no fault theory thus allowing rightful compensation. (Para 9)

Result: Appeal allowed, and the impugned order set aside.

Table of Content
1. submission of appellant and respondent (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. incident details and passenger status (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. court's conclusion on 'untoward incident' (Para 8 , 10)
4. self-inflicted injury principle (Para 9)
5. conclusion and remand for compensation (Para 11 , 12 , 13)

JUDGMENT

Manoj Kumar Ohri, J. (Oral)--By way of the present appeal filed under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (hereinafter, referred to as `the Act'), the appellants/claimants have assailed the order dated 20.07.2009 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi whereby the claim application filed by them was dismissed.

2. Mr. Anshuman Bal, learned counsel for the appellants submits that vide the impugned order, though Smt. Krishna Devi (the deceased) was held to be a bona fide passenger, however the Tribunal erred in arriving at a conclusion that the incident was not an `untoward incident'.

3. Per contra, Mr. Pavan Narang, learned counsel for the respondent has supported the impugned order and submitted that in the proceedings before the Tribunal, the appellant No. 1 (husband of the deceased) had appeared as a witness and gave a statement which was contradictory to the stand taken in the claim application inasmuch as while in the application it was stated that the train had passed through the Sadar Bazar Railway Station, Delhi however, in his testimony it was stated otherwise.

4. I have heard learned counsels for the parties and gone through the entire material placed on record.

5. In the claim application, it was stated that the appellant/claimant No. 1 (Sh. Jai Pal) was the husband of Smt. Krishna Devi (the deceased), while the other claimants were the son and daughters of the deceased. It was claimed that on 16.03.2007, the appellant No. 1 along with the deceased had travelled from Rewari to Sadar Bazar Railway Station by Train No. 4 D after purchasing Ticket bearing Nos. 82965 to 82968. It was further claimed that when the train reached Sadar Bazar Railway Station at about 9:20 a.m., Smt. Krishna Devi while alighting fell from the train on account of sudden & heavy jerk resulting in amputation of her right leg. Smt. Krishna Devi was removed to Lady Harding Medical College and later, to Smt. Sucheta Kiplani Hospital, New Delhi. The deceased succumbed to her injuries on 28.05.2007. The post-mortem of the body was conducted at Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi on 29.05.2007.

6. The Tribunal held the deceased to a bona fide passenger. A perusal of the record would show that Ticket bearing Nos. 82965 to 82968 were exhibited as Ex. AW1/7 before the Tribunal. It was observed that the respondent neither disputed the validity of the ticket(s) nor adduced any evidence to show that they were fake.

Insofar as the second aspect i.e., whether the incident was an `untoward incident' as defined under Section 123(c) of the Act is concerned, it is borne out from the record that DD No. 11A was registered by the police on 16.03.2007 wherein it was recorded that an intimation had been received on that day at about 9:20 a.m. to the effect that a lady's leg has been amputated by Train No. 4 D at Sadar Bazar Railway Station. It is not disputed that Smt. Krishna Devi was removed to the Lady Harding Medical College on 16.03.2007 at 10:10 a.m., and eventually passed away on the fateful day of 28.05.2007 at the Lok Nayak Hospital, New Delhi.

7. In the post-mortem examination Report prepared on 29.05.2007 at the Maulana Azad Medical College (Lok Nayak Hospital), it has been opined that `death is due to septicemia consequent upon blunt force/surface impact to the lower limbs. All injuries were opined to be antemortem in nature and possible in rail traffic accident'. Even as per the DRM Report as well as the statement of appellant No. 1, it is apparent that the deceased and appellant No. 1 undertook the journey from Rewari to Sadar Bazar Railway Station after purchasing Ticket bearing Nos. 82965 to 82968. The a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document