High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Railway's Appeal Against Compensation for Accidental Fall from Train. Deceased was a bona fide passenger who fell due to sudden jerk and jolt, not a trespasser, under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU

Admin

2026-05-18 16:55:54

Font size:

Case Note & Summary

The appeal was filed by the Union of India, represented by the General Manager, South Western Railway, Hubli, against the order dated 28.12.2010 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, in OA No.II U 151/2009, awarding compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- with interest to the respondents, who are the parents of the deceased. The factual matrix is that on 14.02.2009, the deceased came to Whitefield railway station, purchased a journey ticket from Whitefield to Kuppam, and boarded the Mysore-Tirupati passenger train. The train was heavily crowded, and when it reached Kuppam railway station, due to the incoming and outgoing passengers, the deceased could not get down at Kuppam station. He tried to reach the doorway, but due to a sudden jerk and jolt of the train travelling between Kuppam and Mallanur railway stations, he accidentally slipped and fell from the train on the midnight of 14.02.2009, sustaining serious injuries and dying on the spot. The respondents filed a claim application before the Railway Claims Tribunal, which allowed the claim and awarded compensation. The appellant railway challenged the order on the ground that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger and that the incident was not an untoward incident. The High Court, after hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and noting that the respondents were unrepresented, held that the deceased was a bona fide passenger as he had purchased a ticket, and the death was due to an untoward incident under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989. The court found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it, confirming the award of compensation.

Headnote

A) Railways Act - Untoward Incident - Bona Fide Passenger - Section 124A, Railways Act, 1989 - Deceased purchased a journey ticket and boarded the train; he fell from the train due to sudden jerk and jolt while trying to alight at Kuppam station - Held that the deceased was a bona fide passenger and the death was due to an untoward incident, making the railway liable for compensation (Paras 2-5).

B) Railways Act - Compensation - Quantum - Section 124A, Railways Act, 1989 - Tribunal awarded Rs.4,00,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from date of application till order and 9% thereafter - Held that the quantum is not excessive and does not warrant interference (Paras 6-7).

Issue of Consideration

Whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger and whether the death was due to an untoward incident under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, and whether the compensation awarded is excessive.

Final Decision

The appeal is dismissed. The order dated 28.12.2010 passed in OA No.II U 151/2009 on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, is confirmed.

Law Points

Strict liability under Section 124A of the Railways Act
1989
Bona fide passenger
Accidental fall due to sudden jerk
No contributory negligence
Compensation quantum not excessive

Case Details

2024 LawText (KAR) (12) 91

Miscellaneous First Appeal No.2556/2011 (RCT)

2024-12-06

H.P. Sandesh

Sri H. Shanthi Bhushan (for appellant)

The Union of India, Represented by its General Manager, South Western Railway, Hubli

Sri. A. Mohan, S/o Arunachalam, and Smt. Vadivu W/o Mohan

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against order of Railway Claims Tribunal awarding compensation for death due to accidental fall from train.

Remedy Sought

Appellant railway sought to set aside the compensation award.

Filing Reason

The appellant contended that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger and the incident was not an untoward incident.

Previous Decisions

The Railway Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, in OA No.II U 151/2009 dated 28.12.2010, awarded compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- with interest.

Issues

Whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger? Whether the death was due to an untoward incident under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989? Whether the compensation awarded is excessive?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger and the incident was not an untoward incident. Respondents were unrepresented.

Ratio Decidendi

The deceased was a bona fide passenger as he had purchased a ticket, and his death due to falling from the train because of a sudden jerk and jolt constitutes an untoward incident under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, making the railway strictly liable for compensation.

Judgment Excerpts

The factual matrix of claimants before the railway Tribunal in O.A.No.II U 151/2009 is that the deceased on 14.02.2009 came to Whitefield railway station and purchased one journey ticket from Whitefield to Kuppam and boarded the train Mysore-Tirupati passenger. The deceased was a bona fide passenger and the death was due to an untoward incident under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989.

Procedural History

The respondents filed OA No.II U 151/2009 before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, which was allowed on 28.12.2010 awarding compensation. The appellant filed this appeal under Section 23(1) of the Railways Claims Tribunal Act, 1987. The appeal was heard and reserved for judgment on 28.11.2024, and judgment pronounced on 06.12.2024.