* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on : 19.03.2026 Pronounced on : 02.04.2026 Uploaded on : 02.04.2026 + FAO 477/2019 MAHENDRA .....Appellant Through: Mr. Rajan Sood, Ms. Ashima Sood and Ms. Megha Sood, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Shubash Tanwar, CGSC with Mr.Naveen, Mr. Sandeep Mishra, Mr.Harshit Deshwal, Ms. Priyanka and Ms. Ritu, Advocates CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI

JUDGMENT

CM APPL. 51677/2019 (Seeking condonation of delay of 175 days in filing the appeal)

1. By way of the present application, the applicant/ appellant seeks condonation of delay of 175 days in filing the appeal.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that after passing of the impugned judgment, the appellant could not file the present appeal in time on account of paucity of funds and the resultant inability to obtain timely legal advice. It is further submitted that the delay is neither intentional nor deliberate.

3. In this regard, reference may be made to the decision of this Court in Mohsina vs. Union of India¹, wherein a delay of 804 days in filing of the appeal was condoned taking into account the socio-economic condition of the claimants, and the beneficial object of the legislation.

4. Having considered the submissions made and the view of the decision in Mohsina (supra), and keeping in view the beneficial nature of the legislation, this Court is satisfied that the appellant has shown sufficient cause for the delay in filing the present appeal.

5. Accordingly, the application is allowed and the delay of 175 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

6. The application is disposed of in the above terms.

FAO 477/2019

1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 against the judgment dated 06.03.2019 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Tribunal”) in Claim Application No. OA/II(U)/145/2018, whereby the claim application filed by the appellant seeking statutory compensation on account of injuries sustained was dismissed.

2. The case of the appellant before the Tribunal was, that on 01.04.2018, he was travelling from Palam to Rewari by Train No. 54417 (Rewari Passenger Train) on the strength of a valid journey ticket. It was stated that upon reaching Jataula Jodi Sampla, the appellant deboarded the train to drink water, and thereafter, while attempting to re-board the train, he accidentally fell down and sustained grievous injuries.

He, thereafter, was taken to Pataudi Hospital where his MLC was prepared, 1 (2017) SCC OnLine Del 10003 and was subsequently referred to Civil Hospital, Gurgaon.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant assails the impugned judgment contending that the findings returned by the Tribunal are contrary to the material on record. It is submitted that the recovery of a valid journey ticket which was duly verified, clearly establishes his status as a bona fide passenger. It is further submitted that the Tribunal has failed to appreciate the contemporaneous record, including the MLC, which records the case as a “railway track accident”, further lends assurance to the version of the appellant.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent supports the impugned judgment and submits that the appellant has failed to establish that he was a bona fide passenger at the time of the incident. It is contended that the journey ticket was not produced at the first instance and was allegedly handed over after a delay of two days, which creates doubt regarding its genuineness. Reliance is placed on the DRM report to contend that the incident occurred due to the negligence of the appellant while attempting to board the running train.

5. This Court has heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the material on record.

6. In the backdrop of the above, the two questions that arise for consideration are that whether the injuries sustained by the appellant fall within the ambit