Back
KARAMJIT SINGH
Ash Mohd. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mr. Karamjit Singh, J.
(Oral) - The present appeal has been filed by the appellants against the order dated 24.10.2013 passed by the Railways Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (in short 'the Tribunal'), whereby the claim petition filed by the appellants/dependents of Smt. Rajdari, has been dismissed.
2. The brief facts of the case of the appellants are that deceased Rajdari was mother of all the appellants. On 10.12.2011, deceased who was aged about 59 years came to Faridabad along with appellant No.1. From Faridabad, the deceased purchased 2 tickets and then the deceased and appellant No.1 boarded train from Faridabad Railway Station for Hodal and the deceased boarded ladies compartment while appellant No.1 boarded the compartment which was next to ladies compartment. Due to heavy rush the deceased was standing on the gate of the compartment and suddenly the train suffered a heavy jerk due to which deceased fell from running train in between Solaka and Hodal. Appellant No.1 came to know about the said incident when he got down at Railway Station Hodal, where he did not find his mother. The matter was reported to the Railway Authorities and then appellant No.1 reached the p
The absence of a train ticket does not negate the status of a deceased as a bona fide passenger under the Railways Act, as the burden of proof can shift based on circumstantial evidence.
Absence of a train ticket does not negate a claim for compensation under Section 124A of the Railways Act if the deceased is proven to be a bona fide passenger.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the Railways Act provisions regarding untoward incidents and the status of the deceased as a bona-fide passenger.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of strict liability or no-fault liability in railway accidents under Section 124-A of the Railway Act.
Strict liability applies in railway accident claims; proof of ticket not mandatory if other evidence supports passenger status.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Railways Act imposes strict liability or no fault liability in case of railway accidents, and the burden is on the respondent to prove tha....
The absence of a railway ticket does not negate a claim of being a bonafide passenger; the burden of proof shifts to the Railways once the claimant provides relevant evidence.
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
