IMPORTANT POINT
The absence of a ticket does not negate the presumption of a passenger's status, and the Railway is liable for compensation under section 124-A for untoward incidents.

JUDGMENT :

(Duppala Venkata Ramana, J.) :

The present appeal is filed by appellants, being aggrieved by the rejection of their claim application by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhopal Bench vide judgment dated 6-1-2022. The claim being filed under section 16(1) read with section 13(1-A) of Railways Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 and section 124-A of Railways Act, 1989 sought compensation to the tune of Rs. 8,00,000/- with interest @ 12% from the respondent-Railways on account of death of their son in an untoward incident alleged to have been occurred in the intervening night of 12/13-12-2018.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they arrayed before the RCT.

3. The facts of the case, as summarized in the impugned judgment as extracted below.

4. The present claim application that Shubham Dubey was travelling by unknown train Express from Harda to Khandwa on the strength of valid journey ticket during the course of journey in the intervening night of 12/13-12-2018, he accidentally fell down from the running train as a result died on the spot. That, his clothes were badly torn and all his belongings including journey ticket were lost in the alleged incident. When the deceased was not return to home the applicants enquired from his brother Vinod Kumar Dubey who had informed them that Shubham Dubey had already gone to Khandwa by train in the night and when they tried to search him at Khandwa station, from there, he came to know that some one had fallen from the running train during night hours between Mathela-Khandwa section near Ganeshtalai and had died and on further inquiry it was informed that his dead body was at Khandwa hospital and immediately the claimants reached Khandwa Hospital and identified their son (deceased).

5. On 13-12-2018, station master of Mathela, Railway Station received information from the track man Sanjay Pal that unknown dead body lying in the track between Mathela-Khandwa section 569/2017 up and, in turn, station master of Mathela railway station sent a written memo to the City Police Station, Kotwali Khandwa through Sanjay Pal. On receipt of a memo, the City Kotwali registered a merg No. 78/2018 and shifted the dead body where the claimants/appellants identified the dead body of the deceased who is their son and after completing the formalities, handed over the dead body to them for last rites.

6. The claimants who are the parents of the deceased filed a claim petition claiming compensation of Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs) before the RCT on account of the death of their son in an “untoward incident” occurred in the intervening night of 12/13-12-2018 as defined under section 123(c)(2) of the Indian Railways Act, 1989.

7. The respondent- Railway filed the written statement through the General Manager, Western Central Railway, Jabalpur and denied all the averments which were pleaded in the claim petition, further averred that the incident as described in the claim petition is not an untoward incident as defined under section 123(c)(2) of the Railways Act, 1989. Further denied that the deceased is not a bona fide passenger on the date of alleged incident, further averred that the applicants have strict to prove that the deceased was travelling as a bona fide passenger on the date of alleged incident. Further contended that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger of the train and no travel ticket was recovered either at the scene of occurrence or from the possession of the deceased and railway cannot be held liable to pay compensation and prays to dismiss the petition.

8. In view of pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues :

1. Whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger in the train in question at the time of accident?

2. Whether the deceased had died in an untoward incident, while travelling in the train within meaning of section 123(c)(2) of the Railways Act?

3. Whether the respondent is protected under the exemption clause of section 124-A of Railways Act a