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 liability is strict under the Act.

JUDGMENT :

Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi, J.

1. In the present appeal, the Appellants challenge the judgment and order dated 01.01.2024 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar in Original Application No.152 of 2017, which dismissed the claim application for compensation arising out of the death alleged to have occurred in an ‘untoward incident within the meaning of Section 124A of the RAILWAYS ACT , 1989.

I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE

2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

(i) On 05.04.2016, the deceased Budhu Minj was travelling from Raigrah to Brajarajnagar on the strength of valid journey ticket purchased from Raigarh Railway Station bearing the No. VYA- 51990424 by the Gondia-Jharsuguda Passenger Train.

(ii) During the course of the journey the compartment was overcrowded, and due to sudden jerk caused by the application of brakes and the push and pull of passengers, the deceased lost his balance, fell from the running train near Lijkura Railway Station, as a result he was succumbed to injuries and died on the spot.

(iii) The appellants, thereafter, instituted Original Application No. 152 of 2017 before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 and preferred a claim under Section 124A of the Act, seeking statutory compensation on account of the death of the deceased, allegedly occasioned by an “untoward incident” as contemplated under Section 123(c)(2) of the Act.

(iv) Upon perusal of the pleadings and evidentiary materials adduced by the parties, the Learned Tribunal was pleased to frame five distinct issues for determination. After an elaborate evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal ultimately returned findings to the effect that the deceased did not qualify as a bona fide passenger nor, could the occurrence be brought within the statutory ambit of an “untoward incident” under the Act. On the premises, the Original Application came to be dismissed as devoid of merit.

(v) Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 01.01.2024 passed in the Original Application No. 152 of 2017 by the Railways Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar, whereby the claim petition was dismissed, the Appellants have invoked the appellate jurisdiction of this Court by preferring the present appeal, assailing the legality, propriety, and sustainability of the impugned order on both factual and jurisdictional grounds.

II. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANTS

3. Learned counsel for the Appellants earnestly made the following submissions in support of his contentions:

(i) The Appellants contended that the dismissal of the Original Application by the Learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar in connection with the alleged untoward incident resulting in the death of the deceased, is manifestly against the weight of the evidences on record, it is further urged that the impugned judgment suffers from mis-appreciation of the material facts and misapplication of law, rendering the same unsustainable in law. Hence, the impugned judgment and order warrants interference and is liable to be set aside.

(ii) The Appellants contended that when several documents issued by the Police clearly establish the death of the deceased occurred on account of the untoward incident that took place in the course of the journey.

(iii) The Appellants further submitted that the final report of the Investing Agency, the Post-Mortem Report, and the Inquest Proceeding unanimous