Case Note & Summary
The case involves an appeal by the Union of India (Railways) against an award of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, in Claim Application No.164/OA II/RCT/NGP/2008. The respondents, being the widow, children, and parents of the deceased Devidas Manoharrao Sonkamble, had claimed compensation for his death. The deceased was travelling from Purna to Nanded by the Mumbai–Nagpur Nandigram Express Train No.1401 on 8 June 2008. He was seen off by his relative Shantabai Bhimrao Ahire at Purna Station. At KM No. 348/6, near Nanded Railway Station, due to a sudden jerk, he fell from the running train, came under the wheels, and died. The Railways defended the claim on the ground that there was no report from the driver or guard about any passenger falling, and thus no untoward incident occurred. The Tribunal, however, awarded compensation. The High Court framed the moot question as to whether the impugned judgment and order is legally sustainable. The court noted that the widow of the deceased deposed about the untoward incident, and the appellant's counsel argued that there was no credible evidence as she was not an eye witness. The court heard submissions and perused the record. It observed that it was not the case of the Railway Administration that the deceased was travelling without a ticket; there was no such complaint. The evidence of the claimant (Sangeeta) indicated that the deceased was travelling by railway train when he suffered the untoward incident. The court held that the death due to a fall from a train caused by a sudden jerk constitutes an 'untoward incident' under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, and the railway administration is strictly liable to pay compensation. The appeal was dismissed, and the impugned judgment and award were confirmed.
Headnote
A) Railway Law - Untoward Incident - Section 124A Railways Act, 1989 - Strict Liability - Death of a passenger due to fall from train caused by sudden jerk - Held that such an incident falls within the definition of 'untoward incident' and the railway administration is strictly liable to pay compensation, regardless of negligence. (Paras 5-7) B) Railway Law - Burden of Proof - Section 124A Railways Act, 1989 - Presumption of Valid Ticket - In the absence of any complaint by the railway administration that the deceased was travelling without a ticket, the presumption is that he was a bona fide passenger. (Para 7) C) Railway Law - Appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 - Scope of Interference - The appellate court will not interfere with findings of fact unless perverse or based on no evidence. (Para 5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the death of a passenger due to a fall from a running train caused by a sudden jerk constitutes an 'untoward incident' under the Railways Act, 1989, and whether the Railway Claims Tribunal's award of compensation is legally sustainable.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The impugned judgment and award in Claim Application No.164/OA II/RCT/NGP/2008, decided by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur, is confirmed.
Law Points
- Untoward incident
- strict liability
- burden of proof
- presumption of valid ticket
- Railway Claims Tribunal Act
- 1987 Section 23
- Railways Act
- 1989 Section 124A
