THE RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH, CHANDIGARH CORAM:SHRI SHAILENDRA K.SHARMA,HON’BLEMEMBER (TECHNICAL)

Case No: OA/IIU/CDG/107/2024 Date of filing :14.10.2024 Date of decision: 22.04.2026

1. Saroj Devi, aged 49 years, wife of Late Sh. Pratap Singh-the deceased

2. Rekha, aged 31 years, daughter of Sh. Pratap Singh -the deceased

3. Mamta Saini @ Mamta, aged 31 years, daughter of Sh. Pratap Singh-the deceased

4. Pawan Kumar, aged 33 years, son of Sh. Pratap Singh @ Partap Singh-the deceased All residents of House no. 176/25, ward no.5/6, village Nalapur, Tehsil Narnaul, District Mahendragarh, Haryana-123001 ...Applicants Versus Union of India, through General Manager, North Western Railways, Jaipur, Rajasthan ... Respondent APPLICATION FOR CLAIM COMPENSATION Sh. Kuldip Singh Sambhi, ld. counsel for the applicants. (Through VC)

Sh. Paramjeet Singh, ld. counsel for the respondent.

JUDGMENT

JUDGMENTBY SH.SHAILENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

1. The applicants have filed this claim application under Section 16 of the

Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 read with section 124-A of the

Railways Act, 1989 seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 20,00,000/- along with interest. They seek compensation on account of death of Sh. Pratap Singh @ Partap Singh, in an alleged “Untoward Incident” which occurred on 30.06.2024.

2. Originally, the claim application was filed mentioning an incorrect train number i.e. 19619 instead of 19621. Subsequently, an amended claim application was permitted and filed by the applicants after written statement and DRM’s report was filed by the Respondent railway. The same was allowed. The respondent counsel also filed an amended written statement. The case is therefore being considered on the basis of the amended pleadings.

3. The brief facts as stated by the applicants in their amended claim application are that on 30.06.2024, Sh. Pratap Singh (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) along with his son (Pawan Kumar) was travelling by train from Amarpur Jorasi to Rewari Junction on 30.06.2024; that a joint ticket for two adults had been purchased by his son; that due to heavy rush caused by Baba Khattu Shyam Mela, the deceased was standing near the off-side door of the coach; that when the train started with a jerk, he lost balance, fell from the train, came under its wheels, and died at the spot; that the son and other passengers attempted to stop the train by pulling the chain but failed; that the train stopped at Narnaul station where the son deboarded, informed family members, and returned to the place of incident and identified the body; that the journey ticket was produced before GRP Narnaul; that the postmortem was conducted at Civil Hospital Narnaul on the same day. Hence, claiming themselves to be the sole dependents of the deceased and deceased being a bonafide passenger and a victim of untoward incident, the applicants have approached this Tribunal for compensation as per the provisions of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987.

4. On receipt of the notice, the respondent Railway Administration appeared before the Tribunal and filed written statement (initial with DRM’s report and again filed amended reply after amended claim application was filed by the applicants and allowed) and the DRM’s Report relating to the alleged incident. It is averred in the reply that as per the DRM’s report, the dead body was lying at the off side of the train which proves that the deceased was not a bonafide passenger and he committed suicide in the moving train; that if the deceased was trying to board from the off side it further violates the rules under Section 147 of Railway Act which comes under the category of punishable under the Railway Act; that the alleged co-passenger who is the son of the deceased has stated to the police during the recording of the statement that he purchased a ticket of two persons from Amarpur Jorasi to Rewari of Rs 60/ but the price which is mentioned in the ticket is Rs 70/- which prov