Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Railway Accident Claim Case — Deceased's Own Negligence Not a Bar to Compensation Under Railways Act, 1989. Held that 'untoward incident' includes accidental falls from trains regardless of passenger negligence, relying on Jameela v. Union of India.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Accused
  • 5
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellants, parents of the deceased Firdaus Kausar, filed a claim before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur, after their daughter died on 4.2.2010 when she fell from a running train (Train No.1040 Up Gondia-Kolhapur Maharashtra Express) at Ajni Railway Station. The deceased was a bona fide passenger holding a valid ticket. The Tribunal rejected the claim, holding that the death was due to the deceased's own negligence and not an 'untoward incident' under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989. The High Court, in appeal, heard the appellants' counsel who relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Jameela and Others v. Union of India (2010 AIR SC 3705). The Court held that the term 'untoward incident' under Section 124A includes accidental falls from trains, and the negligence of the passenger is not a bar to compensation. The Court set aside the Tribunal's order and allowed the appeal, directing the respondent Union of India to pay compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the claim application till realization.

Headnote

A) Railways Act - Untoward Incident - Section 124A - Negligence of Passenger - The death of a passenger who fell from a running train, even if due to her own negligence, is an 'untoward incident' under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989. The Railway Claims Tribunal erred in rejecting the claim on the ground of negligence, as the provision does not exclude negligence of the passenger. (Paras 1-3)

B) Railways Act - Compensation - Strict Liability - Section 124A - The liability of the railway administration under Section 124A is strict and not dependent on negligence of the passenger. The Apex Court in Jameela v. Union of India held that even if the deceased died due to her own negligence, the claim cannot be rejected. (Para 3)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the death of a passenger due to her own negligence in falling from a running train constitutes an 'untoward incident' under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, entitling the legal heirs to compensation.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal allowed. The judgment of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur in Case No.OA/(LLU)/NGP/2012/0001 dated 4.8.2015 is set aside. The respondent Union of India is directed to pay compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the claim application till realization.

Law Points

  • Untoward incident includes accidental falls from trains
  • Negligence of passenger not a bar to claim
  • Strict liability of railways
  • Section 124A of Railways Act
  • 1989
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2020 LawText (BOM) (02) 159

First Appeal No.1713 of 2019

2020-02-21

M.G. Giratkar

Ms Gayatri Dive h/f Mr.P.R.Agrawal for the Appellants, Mr.P.S.Khubalkar for the Respondent

Abdul Rashid s/o. Abdul Bashir and Parvin Bano w/o. Abdul Rashid

Union of India, Through the General Manager, Central Railway, Mumbai CST

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against rejection of claim for compensation under the Railways Act, 1989 for death of a passenger in a railway accident.

Remedy Sought

Appellants (parents of deceased) sought compensation for the death of their daughter who fell from a running train.

Filing Reason

The Railway Claims Tribunal rejected the claim on the ground that the deceased died due to her own negligence and it was not an untoward incident.

Previous Decisions

Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur in Case No.OA/(LLU)/NGP/2012/0001 dated 4.8.2015 rejected the claim.

Issues

Whether the death of a passenger due to her own negligence in falling from a running train constitutes an 'untoward incident' under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellants' counsel argued that even if the deceased died due to her own negligence, the claim cannot be rejected, relying on Jameela v. Union of India. Respondent's submissions not mentioned.

Ratio Decidendi

The term 'untoward incident' under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989 includes accidental falls from trains, and the negligence of the passenger is not a bar to compensation. The liability of the railway administration is strict.

Judgment Excerpts

Even though the deceased died due to her own negligence, her claim cannot be rejected. It is not a criminal act and the learned Claims Tribunal ought to have allowed the application.

Procedural History

The appellants filed a claim application before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur, which was rejected on 4.8.2015. The appellants then filed the present first appeal before the High Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Railways Act, 1989: Section 124A
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Railway Accident Claim Case — Deceased's Own Negligence Not a Bar to Compensation Under Railways Act, 1989. Held that 'untoward incident' includes accidental falls from trains regardless of passenger negligence, r...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Land Acquisition Case — Enhances Compensation Based on Comparable Sale Deed. Market value of acquired land determined at Rs. 1,00,000 per hectare relying on sale instance of adjacent land with similar potential.