* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on : 14.01.2026 Pronounced on : 17.02.2026 Uploaded on : 17.02.2026 + FAO 153/2019 KALLU & ANR .....Appellants Through: Mr. Rajan Sood, Ms. Ashima Sood and Ms. Megha Sood, advocates versus UNION OF INDIA .....Respondent Through: Ms. Amrita Prakash, CGSC with Mr.

Vishal Ashwani Mehta and Ms. Anju Kaushik Advocates CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI

JUDGMENT

CM APPL. 16046/2019 (Seeking condonation of delay of 237 days in filing the present appeal)

1. By way of the present application, the applicants/appellants seek condonation of delay of 237 days in filing of the accompanying appeal.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that after the passing of the judgment/order dated 12.04.2018 (hereinafter referred to as “impugned judgment”), the appellants were unable to file the appeal within the prescribed period. It is submitted that the delay is bona fide and neither intentional nor deliberate. It is further submitted that the appellants belong to an economically weak section and due to paucity of funds, could not obtain timely legal advice.

3. It is worthwhile to note that in “Mohsina v. Union of India” ¹, a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court condoned a delay of 804 days in filing the appeal, taking into account the weak economic status of the appellants/claimants.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, and guided by the principle laid down in the aforementioned decision as well as the beneficial nature of the concerned legislation, this Court finds that the appellants have been able to show sufficient cause for the delay caused in filing of the accompanying appeal.

5. Accordingly, the application is allowed and the delay of 237 days in filing is condoned.

6. The application is disposed of in above terms.

FAO 153/2019

1. The present appeal is filed under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, assailing the judgment/order dated 12.04.2018 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi, in Case No. OA (IIu)

No. 96/2017 titled as ‘Shri Kallu & Anr. v. Union of India’.

1 (2017) SCC OnLine Del 10003

2. Vide the aforesaid judgment, the Tribunal dismissed the claim application of the appellants’/claimants’ on the grounds that the deceased was not proved to be a bona fide passenger and that the alleged incident was not an “untoward incident” as defined under Section 123(c)(2) of the Railways Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”).

3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case, as set out in the claim application are that on 25.08.2016, one Ishwar Deen (hereinafter referred to as “deceased”) was traveling with his uncle, Bhaiya Ram from Rohtak to Shakur Basti, on the strength of valid second-class journey tickets bearing No.(s) 56113432 and 56113433, worth Rs.15/- each. While the deceased and his uncle were trying to de-board the train at Shakur Basti Railway Station, the train suddenly jerked, as a result of which the deceased fell down and died on the spot, while Bhaiya Ram sustained injuries. Thereafter, the deceased was removed to Aruna Asaf Ali Hospital, where his post-mortem was conducted, and Bhaiya Ram was taken to Acharya Bhikshu Hospital.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants assails the impugned judgement by contending firstly, that the deceased was a bona fide passenger and secondly, that the alleged incident qualifies as an “untoward incident”. It is submitted that the tickets in question were valid, having been purchased for Rs.15/- each, and had been duly handed over by Bhaiya Ram to the investigation agency, which was subsequently verified. It is further submitted that the mere fact that the body of the deceased has been found beyond the intended destination station does not affect his bona fide passenger status. Lastly, it is submitted that the body of the deceased was proved to have been found lying at KM No.9/1 Down line, instead of KM No.9/1 Up line, which falls on the track line followed by the train in question.