Case Note & Summary
The appellants, parents of the deceased Susanta Roy, filed a claim for compensation under the Railways Act, 1989, alleging that their son died on 2 January 2018 when he fell from a running train (Danapur to Bengaluru Sanghmitra Express) due to heavy crowd. The Railway Claims Tribunal dismissed the claim, holding that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger as no ticket was found on his body, and that the incident was not an untoward incident. On appeal, the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur examined the evidence, including the inquest panchanama and the claimants' testimony that the deceased had purchased a valid ticket. The court noted that the ticket could have been lost during the fall. The court held that the absence of a ticket on the body is not conclusive; the claimants had sufficiently proved that the deceased was a bona fide passenger. Further, the court held that falling from a train due to crowd constitutes an 'untoward incident' under Section 123(c) of the Railways Act, and the railway is strictly liable under Section 124A unless exceptions apply. The railway failed to prove any exception. The court allowed the appeal, set aside the tribunal's order, and awarded compensation of Rs. 8,00,000 with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the claim petition.
Headnote
A) Railways Act - Bona Fide Passenger - Absence of Ticket - The mere absence of a ticket on the deceased's body does not conclusively prove he was not a bona fide passenger; the claimants can prove by other evidence that a valid ticket was purchased. (Paras 5-8) B) Railways Act - Untoward Incident - Fall from Train - A passenger falling from a running train due to crowd and push constitutes an 'untoward incident' under Section 123(c) read with Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, and the railway is strictly liable for compensation unless exceptions apply. (Paras 9-11) C) Railways Act - Strict Liability - Burden of Proof - Once the claimants establish that the deceased died in an untoward incident, the burden shifts to the railway to prove any exception under Section 124A; the railway's failure to prove that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger or that the incident was due to his own negligence results in liability. (Paras 10-12)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger despite the ticket not being found on his person, and whether his death due to falling from a crowded train constitutes an 'untoward incident' under the Railways Act, 1989.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment and award of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur dated 17/03/2023 is set aside. The respondent/Union of India is directed to pay compensation of Rs. 8,00,000 with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the claim petition till realization, within three months.
Law Points
- Bona fide passenger
- untoward incident
- strict liability
- burden of proof
- presumption of validity of ticket
- Railways Act
- 1989
- Section 124A
- Section 124
- Section 123(c)
- compensation
