Case Note & Summary
The present appeal was filed by the Union of India under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, challenging the award dated 20.08.2025 passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench in Claim Petition O.A. (IIU) No.611 of 2025 (DT). The Tribunal had directed the appellant to pay compensation of ₹8,00,000/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the incident, i.e., 13.11.2024, to the heirs of the deceased Harsingbhai s/o Veersingbhai Damor. The factual matrix reveals that the claim petition was filed by the heirs of the deceased on 20.01.2025, contending that on 13.11.2024, during the course of his journey in Train No.19819, Vadodara–Kota Express, while travelling from Vadodara to Kota Railway Station, near Bildi Railway Station, due to a sudden jerk and jolt of the train, the deceased lost his balance and accidentally fell from the running train. He was dragged along with the train and sustained multiple grievous injuries. He was thereafter taken to Ratlam for emergency medical treatment by a goods train bearing No. R/PIDN DN with the help of railway staff and police; however, he ultimately succumbed to the injuries sustained. On issuance of notice, the appellant appeared and opposed the claim petition, contending that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger as no valid ticket was found. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence, including the DRM report and the fact that the deceased was found with injuries near the railway track, held that the deceased was a bona fide passenger and that the death was due to an accidental fall. The High Court, in its analysis, noted that the appellant failed to discharge the burden of proving that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger. The Court observed that the DRM report itself indicated that the deceased fell from the train, and there was no evidence to suggest that the deceased was trying to board or alight from a moving train or was committing suicide. The Court further held that the interest rate of 9% per annum was reasonable. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the award of the Tribunal was upheld.
Headnote
A) Railway Law - Accidental Falling - Bona Fide Passenger - Section 23, Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 - The appeal challenged the Tribunal's award of ₹8,00,000 compensation for death due to accidental fall from train. The Court held that the deceased was a bona fide passenger as the incident occurred during journey, and the fall was accidental due to sudden jerk. The burden to prove lack of bona fides lies on the Railways, which was not discharged. (Paras 1-10) B) Railway Law - Compensation - Interest Rate - Section 23, Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 - The Court upheld the 9% per annum interest from the date of incident, finding it reasonable and consistent with precedents. (Para 10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger and whether the death occurred due to an accidental fall from the train, entitling the claimants to compensation under the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The award dated 20.08.2025 passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench in Claim Petition O.A. (IIU) No.611 of 2025 (DT) is upheld. The appellant is directed to pay the compensation amount with interest as awarded.
Law Points
- Accidental falling from train
- Bona fide passenger
- Burden of proof
- Railway Claims Tribunal Act
- 1987 Section 23
- Compensation for untoward incident
