Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(RCT) 353

RAILWAY CLAIM TRIBUNAL - DELHI
Mukesh Nigam, Vice-Chairman
Khushmeraj Khatoon – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
OA/II/U/DLI/382/2021

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: C.P. Singh
For the Respondents: Leelawati Suman

A claimant establishes their status as a bonafide passenger in an untoward incident by filing an affidavit supported by corroborating evidence like a valid journey ticket; once the accident is linked to train movement, the railway is liable to pay compensation under the Railways Act.

Headnote:(A) Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 - Section 16 - Railways Act, 1989 - Sections 123(c)(2) and 124-A - Untoward incident - Deceased fell from a train - Claim for compensation by dependents - Proof of bonafide passenger status - Mere presence of body on railway premises not conclusive but filing of affidavit as to incident and recovery of valid journey ticket from the body of the deceased establishes claim - Passengers falling from the train during the journey are covered under the definition of untoward incident. (Paras 15, 16, 20, 22)

(B) Financial Protection of Minor and Illiterate Claimants - Railway Accidents and Untoward Incidents (Compensation) Rules, 1990 - Rule 5 - Mode of payment - In order to protect claimants from exploitation by middlemen or touts and to ensure judicious use of compensation amount, disbursement of award shall be made through annuities, fixed deposits or other suitable modes, particularly for minor claimants. (Paras 24, 25, 29, 30)

Facts of the case:
The deceased was travelling on the train when he accidentally fell and died. A journey ticket for the route was recovered from the body. The applicants, being the wife, minor son, and parents of the deceased, filed an application for compensation. The respondent-Railway disputed the incident and the bonafide status of the passenger.

Findings of Court:
The court determined that the presence of a journey ticket and corroboration from the train route and timings established that the deceased was a bonafide passenger who died in an untoward incident. The claim was allowed for the sum of Rs. 8,00,000/-.

Issues: Whether the deceased was a bonafide passenger and whether the death occurred in an untoward incident as per the Railways Act, 1989.

Ratio Decidendi: The burden of proof to establish a bonafide passenger status is initially on the claimant, which can be discharged via affidavits; thereafter, the respondent must rebut the same. Once the presence of a ticket and the alignment of the accident with train journey details are established, the incident qualifies as an untoward incident under law.

Result: Application allowed.

Table of Content
1. summary of facts and framing of adjudication issues. (Para 1 , 2)
2. procedural history, evidence presentation, and documentary exhibits. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
3. establishment of bonafide passenger status and untoward incident occurrence. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22)
4. dependency and disbursement protocols for protected claimants. (Para 23 , 24 , 25)
5. final award and execution directions for railway administration. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39)

Application under Section 16 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 in respect of claim for compensation for death in an untoward incident.

Value of claim: 10,00,000/- (along with 18% interest).

Present:

For the applicants: Sh. C.P. Singh, Learned Counsel through virtual mode.

For the respondent: Ms. Leelawati Suman, Learned Counsel.

JUDGEMENT

By Sh. Mukesh Nigam, Vice-Chairman (Technical)

1. The basic details relating to the accident as contained in the application are listed as under:-

a.	Date of accident	18/19-06-2015
b.	Person (hereinafter referred to as (“Deceased”)	Abdul Kalam Nat
c.	Relationship of the claimants with the deceased.	Wife, minor son and parents
d.	Train involved	15273
e.	Place of occurrence of untoward incident	Near Chanetirailway station
f.	Untoward incident narrated :(Reproduced in verbatim) “Para 6(b) :The deceased accidentally fell down from the train on 18/19-06-2015 in night near Chaneti railway station (Bareilly) due to received grievous injuries, he died. Para 7:Second class railway ticket from Raxaul Jn. to Delhi Railway Station is in custody of GRP Raibareilly. Para 8:Death due to grievous injuries received in all over body of deceased. Para 9:After death dead body of deceased was attended by Medical Officer on duty of Mortuary Bareilly.”
g.	Written Statement	Filed on 23.02.2015
h.	Averments in reply in Written Statement: (Para no. 12, 13 & 14 of Preliminary Objections -Reproduced in verbatim) “12. That the deceased was neither a passenger nor accidentally fell down from the train in question on the alleged date of incident. 13. That particulars furnished by the claimant in the para 6 of the claim application are not sufficient to attract the ingredients of Section 123 read with Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989. 14. That if it is proved that the deceased was a bonafide passenger, even then the respondents/Railway Administration is fully protected under exemption clause of Section 124A of Railways Act, 1989. Therefore the case of the applicants is not covered in the definition of "Untoward incident" as provided in law.”

2. On 23.02.2016, the following issues were framed for adjudication :-

“1. Whether the Deceased was a bonafide passenger of the train in question?

2. Whether incident of death of the deceased falls under the ambit of an untoward incident as defined U/S 123(c) (2) read with Section 124-A of Rlys. Act, 1989?

3. Whether the applicant is only dependant of the deceased?

4. To what Relief?”

3. On 28.02.2025, the Bench had observed the following:-

“On 27th February 2023, noticing that various adjournments have been availed to lead evidence of the applicant, the case was dismissed for default with a liberty to the applicant to file an appropriate application to revive the case. On the restoration application filed, on 27.02.2025, a Division Bench of this Tribunal had passed the following order :-

"On 27 February 2023. OA/IIU/DLI(LKO)/382/21 was dismissed for default. Today, an application for restoration of the case is listed. Sh. Jitendra Kumar, Ld. CLA has submitted that in case the case is restored, there is every possibility that again adjournment shall be obtained and no evidence of the applicant shall be available. Sh. CP Singh, counsel for the applicant appeared virtually along with Sh. Ravi Kumar who is present in Court, they have assured and undertaken that in case the case is fixed on 28th February 2025. entir

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(RCT) 353

RAILWAY CLAIM TRIBUNAL - DELHIMukesh Nigam, Vice-ChairmanKhushmeraj Khatoon – AppellantVersusUnion of India – RespondentOA/II/U/DLI/382/2021

A claimant establishes their status as a bonafide passenger in an untoward incident by filing an affidavit supported by corroborating evidence like a valid journey ticket; once the accident is linked to train movement, the railway is liable to pay compensation under the Railways Act.

RAILWAY CLAIM TRIBUNAL - DELHI
Mukesh Nigam, Vice-Chairman
Khushmeraj Khatoon – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
OA/II/U/DLI/382/2021