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 29.06.2009 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, in O.A.No.105/2007. The Tribunal had awarded compensation of Rs.4,00,000 with interest at 9% per annum to the respondents, who are the legal heirs of the deceased R.Selvaraj. The deceased died on 02.08.2006 after falling from a moving train (Marikuppa-Bangalore Passenger, Train No.513) at Oorgaum Railway Station while boarding with a valid ticket (No.71789). The claimants filed a petition under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, claiming that the death was due to an untoward incident. The Railway contested the claim, alleging that the deceased might have committed suicide or was negligent, but failed to produce any evidence. The Tribunal allowed the claim. In appeal, the High Court considered whether the incident fell within the definition of 'untoward incident' under Section 123(c) and whether the Railway was liable. The Court held that the deceased was a passenger with a valid ticket and that falling from a moving train while boarding is an untoward incident. The Railway did not prove any exception under Section 124A. The Court dismissed the appeal, confirming the compensation award.
Headnote
A) Railways Act - Untoward Incident - Section 123(c) and Section 124A - Strict Liability - The death of a passenger who fell from a moving train while boarding with a valid ticket is an 'untoward incident' under Section 123(c) of the Railways Act, 1989. The Railway is strictly liable to pay compensation under Section 124A unless it proves one of the exceptions, such as suicide or self-inflicted injury. In this case, the Railway failed to prove any exception. (Paras 2-5)
B) Railways Act - Burden of Proof - Section 124A - Exception - The burden of proving that the death was due to suicide or self-inflicted injury lies on the Railway. Mere suspicion or absence of eyewitnesses is insufficient. The Tribunal's finding that the deceased was a bona fide passenger with a valid ticket and that the incident was an untoward incident was upheld. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the death of R.Selvaraj due to falling from a moving train while boarding constitutes an 'untoward incident' under Section 123(c) of the Railways Act, 1989, and whether the Railway is liable to pay compensation under Section 124A of the said Act.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order of the Railway Claims Tribunal awarding compensation of Rs.4,00,000 with interest at 9% per annum from the date of the order till actual payment. The miscellaneous petition for stay was also dismissed.
Law Points
- Untoward incident
- strict liability
- burden of proof on railway
- passenger with valid ticket
- exception of self-inflicted injury or negligence
- Section 124A Railways Act
- 1989
- Section 123(c) Railways Act
Case Details
2013 LawText (KAR) (04) 13
M.F.A.No.8501/2009 (RCT) A/W Misc.Cvl.22452/2009
Sri N.S.Sanjay Gowda for appellant, Sri P.Prasanna Kumar for Sri C.H.Jadhav for respondents
The Union of India, reptd. by its General Manager, South Western Railway, Hubli
Smt. Lakshmi, Smt. S. Chandrakala, Kumari S. Priya, Raman, Lakshman
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Appeal against order of Railway Claims Tribunal awarding compensation for death due to untoward incident.
Remedy Sought
Appellant (Railway) sought to set aside the Tribunal's order awarding compensation of Rs.4,00,000 with interest.
Filing Reason
The Railway disputed the claim that the death was due to an untoward incident and alleged suicide or negligence.
Previous Decisions
Railway Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, in O.A.No.105/2007 dated 29.06.2009 awarded compensation of Rs.4,00,000 with interest at 9% p.a.
Issues
Whether the death of R.Selvaraj due to falling from a moving train while boarding constitutes an 'untoward incident' under Section 123(c) of the Railways Act, 1989?
Whether the Railway is liable to pay compensation under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, and whether any exception applies?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant (Railway) argued that the deceased might have committed suicide or was negligent, and that the incident was not an untoward incident.
Respondents (claimants) argued that the deceased was a bona fide passenger with a valid ticket and died due to an untoward incident, entitling them to compensation.
Ratio Decidendi
The death of a passenger who falls from a moving train while boarding with a valid ticket is an 'untoward incident' under Section 123(c) of the Railways Act, 1989. The Railway is strictly liable under Section 124A unless it proves one of the exceptions, such as suicide or self-inflicted injury. The burden of proof lies on the Railway, and mere suspicion is insufficient to discharge that burden.
Judgment Excerpts
The facts which are not in dispute are that on 01.08.2006 R.Selvaraj while in the process of getting in to train bearing No.513 which was proceeding from Marikuppam to Bangalore at Oorgaum Station fell down from the moving train, injured himself and succumbed to the same on the next day i.e., on 2.8.2006.
It was also contended by them that he was passenger in the said train with valid ticket bearing No.71789.
Procedural History
The legal heirs of deceased R.Selvaraj filed a claim petition (O.A.No.105/2007) before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, claiming compensation for his death due to an untoward incident. The Tribunal allowed the claim on 29.06.2009, awarding Rs.4,00,000 with interest. The Union of India (Railway) appealed to the High Court of Karnataka in M.F.A.No.8501/2009, along with a miscellaneous petition for stay (Misc.Cvl.22452/2009). The High Court heard the appeal and dismissed it on 03.04.2013.
Acts & Sections
- Railways Act, 1989: Section 23(1), Section 123(c), Section 124A
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Order 41 Rule 5
