Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
DUPPALA VENKATA RAMANA, J.
Brijlal Ahirwar and others – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
Misc. Appeal No. 2677 of 2018
Decided on : 14-05-2024
Compensation - Railway Claims - Railways Act, 1989 - Sections 123(c)(2), 124, 124-A - The court interpreted the definitions of 'untoward incident' and 'bona fide passenger' under the Railways Act, concluding that the deceased was a bona fide passenger who died in an untoward incident, thus entitled to compensation.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, a bona fide passenger, fell from a train and died. The claim for compensation was dismissed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, which found no evidence of a valid ticket and suggested suicide.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Tribunal's dismissal was based on erroneous conclusions regarding the deceased's status as a bona fide passenger and the nature of the incident, emphasizing the need for a liberal interpretation of the law.
Issues: Whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger and if the incident constituted an untoward incident under the Railways Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the absence of a ticket does not negate the claim of being a bona fide passenger, and the incident fell under the definition of an untoward incident, warranting compensation.
Result: The appeal is allowed, and the appellants are entitled to compensation of Rs. 8,00,000.
JUDGMENT :
This present appeal has been filed by the appellants/claimants against the judgment of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhopal (in short ‘the Tribunal’) dated 12-4-2018, whereby the claim petition filed by the appellants being dependents of the deceased-Manoharlal Ahirwar has been dismissed.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they arrayed before the RCT.
3. Succinctly stated, the brief facts of this case are that the deceased-Manoharlal Ahirwar was son of first and second appellants and husband of third appellant and father of the fourth and fifth appellants. That on 28-12-2012 the deceased was a passenger of the train Bhopal-Jodhpur passenger travelling Ex-Vidisha to Mungawali holding a valid II-class ordinary journey ticket. When the train was about to arrive at Mungawali station the deceased came to the door of the coach to get down, due to heavy crowd in the compartment and jolting of the train and push by the co-passengers from behind and unexpectedly fell down from the running train and died on the spot. On the memo of the Station Manager, Mungawali, Govt. Railway Police Guna registered vide merg No. 13/2012 and conduct naksha panchayatnama and forwarded the dead body to the Govt. Hospital Mungawali for autopsy. The journey ticket was lost along with his bag containing other things of the deceased.
4. The deceased was a bona fide passenger of the train and died due to untoward incident and the applicants/claimants are being the parents, wife and children of the deceased who are legal dependents, filed claim application claiming compensation of Rs. 8,00,000/- (Eight Lakhs Rupees) before the RCT at Bhopal on account of the death of the deceased in an “untoward incident” occurred on 28-12-2012 as defined under section 123(c)(2) of the Act of 1989.
5. The respondent/railway denied the happening of any untoward incident as alleged by the appellants, further denied that on 28-12-2012, deceased was a passenger travelling by train Bhopal-Jodhpur passenger and fell down due to push by co-passenger near Mungawali station. Further averred that the investigation report reveals that the deceased committed suicide by jumping before the engine of the train and died and it was further pleaded that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger, no journey ticket was recovered from the dead body. Further contended that the railway administration is not responsible for the death of the deceased. The written statement is supported by the DRM report. It is prayed that the claim application may be dismissed.
6. Basing on the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues on 9-12-2014 :—
2. Whether the death of the deceased was caused due to an untoward incident as defined under section 123(c)(2) read with 124 of the Railways Act, 1989?
3. Whether the respondent Railway Administration is protected under section 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989 and is not liable to pay any compensation to the applicants?
4. Whether the appellants are the legal dependents of the deceased to claim/receive the compensation, if any, granted? who else are the dependents?
5. Relief and cost?
7. In order to establish the claim of the applicants at the time of inquiry, Brijlal Ahirwar, father of the deceased filed an affidavit examined as PW-1 and cross-examined by respondent’s counsel and got marked Ex.A-1 to A-11 on behalf of the claimants, no evidence led by the respondent except marking of Ex.R-1 (DRM report) dated 16-5-2024 on behalf of the respondent.
8. On appreciation of evidence of PW-1 and placing reliance on Ex. A-1 to A-11 and Ex.-R-1 (DRM report), the learned Claims Tribunal, while passing the impugned order came to a conclusion that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger of the train holding a valid journey ticket. The admission of the applicant in the statement dated 11-6-2015 ab
The absence of a ticket does not disqualify a deceased from being considered a bona fide passenger under the Railways Act, and incidents leading to death can be classified as untoward incidents warra....
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.
The court held that the deceased was a bona fide passenger and the incident constituted an ‘untoward incident’ under the Railways Act, thus entitling the claimants to compensation.
The mere absence of a journey ticket does not negate a claim of being a bona fide passenger under the Railways Act, as the initial burden lies on the claimants and shifts to the Railways to disprove ....
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.
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 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 court ruled that an accidental falling of a bona fide passenger from a train constitutes an 'untoward incident' under the Railways Act, mandating strict liability for compensation, irrespective o....
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 ....
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
