Back
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Lalita Devi – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, through General Manager, East Central Railway – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.
Heard Mrs. Chaitali C. Sinha, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr. Akash Deep, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the sole respondent/Union of India.
2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 18.03.2015 passed by learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Ranchi Bench in Case No. OA (IIU) RNC/2012/0053 in an application under section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 which has been rejected by the said learned Tribunal.
3. Mrs. Sinha, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the deceased namely, Laxman Saw on 09.07.2012 after purchasing a valid 2nd class ordinary ticket bearing No. 044264412-ex-Baidyanath Dham to Gaya reached Jhajha by train. He then boarded from Jhajha Train No. 5233 UP Kolkata-Darbhanga Express for going to Kiul from where he was to board another train for going to Gaya Jn. There was a rush in the compartment and when the train was approaching Kiul Jn. he reached near the gate of the compartment to get down. However, due to jostling amongst the passenger he fell down from the moving train at Kiul Jn. and sustained serious injuries and died during treatment at
The Railway Administration is strictly liable to compensate for the death of a bona fide passenger resulting from an untoward incident, irrespective of negligence, provided the incident falls within ....
The court established that minor discrepancies in documentation do not negate a claim for compensation under the Railways Act when substantial evidence supports the claim of an untoward incident.
Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989 imposes strict liability on Railways for deaths from untoward incidents, with no requirement for proving negligence or production of a ticket to establish bona ....
The court established that a claimant must demonstrate foundational facts for compensation under the Railways Act; non-recovery of a ticket does not negate passenger status, and the railway's liabili....
The absence of a journey ticket does not negate a claim for compensation under the Railways Act; once prima facie evidence of being a bona fide passenger is established, the burden shifts to the Rail....
The absence of a valid ticket does not negate the presumption of a passenger's bona fide status, and the Railway Administration is strictly liable for untoward incidents.
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....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
