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 statutory definitions.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjeeb K Panigrahi, J.

1. In the present appeal, the Appellants challenge the judgment and order dated 21.01.2020 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar in Original Application No.57 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 05.02.2017, the deceased Aditya Prasad Sahu was travelling from Angul to Sambalpur on the strength of valid journey ticket by the Tapaswinin Express Train.

(ii) It was the case of the Appellants that 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 in between Angul and Kergenga Railway Station, as a result he was succumbed with injuries and died on the spot.

(iii) The appellants, thereafter, instituted Original Application No. 57 of 2017 before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, (hereinafter referred to as “the Act” for brevity), seeking compensation under Section 124A of the RAILWAYS ACT , 1989, on account of the death of the deceased, allegedly occasioned by an “untoward incident”.

(iv) The Respondent-Railway contended that the deceased’s death did not constitute an untoward incident under Section 123(c)(2) of the Act, but fell within the exceptions enumerated in Section 124-A, including self-inflicted injury or the passenger’s own criminal act.

(v) On the basis of the pleadings the Tribunal framed five issues for adjudication. It found that the appellants have failed to discharge the burden of proving that the deceased was a victim of an untoward incident as defined under Section 123(c)(2) of the Act. The Tribunal further observed that the death may have arisen from causes falling within exceptions (a) to (c) of Section 124A of the RAILWAYS ACT .

(vi) Accordingly, the Tribunal held that the appellants were not entitled to compensation from the Railway Administration, and the issues were decided against them.

(vii)Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 21.01.2020 passed in the Original Application No. 57 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 misappreciat