IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI

M. F. A. NO.904 OF 2019 (RCT)

BETWEEN:

1 . M. V. SHIVAYOGI

S/O VIRUPAKSHAIAH

AGE 85 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST

2 . SARWAMANGALAMMA

W/O M V SHIVAYOGI

AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS

BOTH ARE R/O BHARAMASAGAA VILLAGE,

CHITRADURGA TALUK & DISTRICT – 577 501.

...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. R SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 .

UNION OF INDIA

REPRESENTED BY GENERAL MANAGER,

SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY, HUBBALLI – 580 020.

2 .

V M SHIVAPRASAD

S/O M V SHIVAYOGI

AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,

R/O BHARAMASAGARA VILLAGE,

CHITRADURGA TALUK & DISTRICT – 577 501.

….RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. ABHINAY Y.T., ADVOCATE FOR R-1

NOTICE TO R-2 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER

DATED 18.03.2021)

2

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 23(1) OF RAILWAY

CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER

DATED 17.08.2018 PASSED ON OA II U 141/2016 ON THE FILE

OF THE RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU BENCH,

DISMISSING THE CLAIM APPLICATION AS PER FINDINGS AND

SPEAKING ORDER IN THE FOREGOING PARAS.

THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE

COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the applicants under Section

23(1) of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (hereinafter

referred to as the RCT Act), challenging the judgment dated

17.08.2018 passed in OA II U 141/2016 by the Railway

Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as the

Tribunal).

2.

Brief facts leading rise to filing of this appeal are

as under :

That on 07.06.2016 at about 6.30 p.m., the deceased-

V.M.Mahesh informed the family members and proceeded to

Dharmasthala. Applicants contended that the deceased was

a bonafide passenger and along with a valid journey ticket

bearing No.A-85815362 boarded Hospet-Bangalore train and

3

that due to heavy rush and thrust of passengers, the

deceased accidentally fell down from the moving train,

sustained grievous injuries to the vital parts of the body and

succumbed to the injuries.

2.1 The applicants being the legal representatives of

the deceased have filed application before the Tribunal under

Section 16 of RCT Act read with Section 124-A and 125 of

Indian

Railways

Act,

1989

seeking

compensation

of

Rs.8,00,000/- from respondent.

2.2. The respondent filed written statement disputing

the

claim

and

denying

their

liability

to

pay

the

compensation. It was contended that the application is not

maintainable either in law or on facts and since the alleged

incident does not fall within the ambit of Section 123 or

124-A of Indian Railways Act, there is no cause of action for

the applicants to file the claim petition. Hence, prayed to

dismiss the claim petition.

4

2.3. The Tribunal on basis of the pleadings of both

parties, framed the following issues :

1. Whether the deceased was a bonafide passenger?

2. Whether there was any untoward incident as is

defined under the provisions of Section 123(c) of Railways

Act, 1989?

3. Whether the applicants are dependents of the

deceased?

4. Whether the applicants are entitled for any relief and

interest as prayed for in the claim petition?

2.4. The applicants in order to prove their case, the

first applicant Sri.M.V.Shivayogi, father of the deceased, was

examined as AW-1 and the documents exhibits A1 to

A17 were marked. The respondent did not adduce any oral

evidence, but filed the Divisional Railway Manager Report

dated 26.06.2018 and the Divisional Security Commissioner,

RPF/Mysore’s proceedings No.Y/SXC/Claims /UI.1/DVG/2017

5

dated

26.06.2018

along

with

the

report

of

Inspector/RPF/Davanagere.

2.5 The Tribunal after recording the evidence and

considering the material on record held that the applicants

have failed to prove that the deceased was a bonafide

passenger and that the deceased died of any untoward

incident. Further has held that in view of answering issu