IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS RESERVED ON : 22.12.2023 PRONOUNCED ON : 17.04.2024 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR C.M.A. No. 2629 of 2021

1. Riyana Begum. B 2. Mohamed Arasad

3. Aathila Fathima

4. Laila Beevi ... Appellants / Appellants (Appellant No.2 & 3 are represented by the Mother and Natural Guardian)

Vs.

Union of India through General Manager, Souther Railway, Chennai. ... Respondent / Respondent Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 23 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 to set aside the judgment dated 24.03.2021 made in O.A. (11-u)135/2019 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench.

For Appellants : Mr.E.Vinothkumar For Respondent : Mr.M.Vijay Anand JUDGMENT This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the appellants to set aside the dismissal of claim petition made in O.A. (11-u)135/2019, dated

24.03.2021 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench.

2. The appellants / claimants are the dependants of N. Jahankir, vegetable merchant, who died in the Railway accident on 05.10.2018. The deceased Jahankir and his friend John, in order to travel from Kuzhithurai to Madurai, bought train tickets at Kuzhithurai railway station, while they were in the platform no.2 at about 21:50 hours, hit by train No.12660, Shalimar to Nagercoil, Gurudev Express. Both of them were taken to Kuzhithurai Government Hospital and Jahankir succumbed to injuries in the Kuzhithurai Government Hospital on the same day. Since it is the case of untoward incident, the dependants have come forward with claim petition seeking compensation.

3. The respondent - Railway in the reply statement stated that as per the DRM Report, it was concluded that the deceased was a bonafide passenger but he trespassed and was sitting on the edge of the platform no.2 on the Kuzhithurai railway station, which resulted in accident.

4. The Railway Claims Tribunal after conducting enquiry and based on the DRM Report has held that the deceased recklessly crossed the railway track and sat on the edge of the railway platform, the act of the deceased shall not be termed as 'untoward incident' and the Railway Claims Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition.

5. Aggrieved over the dismissal of claim petition, this appeal has been filed by the claimants / dependants of the deceased.

6. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that, admittedly the deceased has sustained injuries while awaiting in the platform to board a train and he was holding a valid travel ticket. But purely on suspicion raised in the DRM report, the Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition which is not sustainable and prays to award compensation. He has also relied on the judgment of this Court passed in Rajalakshmi and two others Vs. Union of India in C.M.A.No.4371 of 2019 dated 08.03.2021 in support of his contention that unintentional trespass of the passenger is liable to be punished under the Act, shall not be a valid ground to deny compensation.

7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that, since the deceased trespassed by crossing the railway track, the accident occurred, hence, it is a case of self-inflicted injury and shall not be termed as 'untoward incident'. The Tribunal properly appreciated the evidence and dismissed the claim petition and prays to confirm the same.

8. I have considered the submissions of both sides and perused the records. The DRM Report is the basis for rejecting the claim petition, which shows that the deceased Jahankir and his friend John have purchased train ticket to travel from Kuzhithurai to Madurai. On the night of 05.10.2018, both the deceased and his friend were sitting on the edge of the platform no.2 of Kuzhithurai railway station. At about 21:12 hours, Train No.12660 was proceeding from Thiruvananthapuram to Nagercoil, crossed Kuzhithurai railway station at Km.No.258. The Loco Pilot of the train also noticed two persons were sitting on the platform and he blew the horn and applied emergency