Nawlesh Prasad & Anr vs Union Of India
2014 Latest Caselaw 774 Del

$~8 to 10

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+             FAO 557/2011, FAO 560/2011 and FAO 561/2011

%                                                    10th February, 2014



       NAWLESH PRASAD & ANR                                   ..... Appellants
                   Through: None

                            versus

       UNION OF INDIA                                 ..... Respondent

                            Through:     Mr.J.K.Singh, Adv.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA

To be referred to the Reporter or not?

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)

1. On the last date of hearing adjournment was sought on behalf of the

appellants and which was allowed in the interest of justice subject to

depositing of costs of Rs.5,00/- in each of the appeals. Today no one

appears on behalf of the appellants and nor is there any proof that costs have

been deposited. It may be noted that even earlier on 12.02.2013

adjournment was sought on behalf of the appellants.

FAO Nos.557/2011 & conn. matters page 1 of 5

2. Counsel for the respondent very strongly opposes the adjournment

and states that strategies are being used to unnecessarily delay the disposal

of the appeals which be decided on merits. I have therefore heard the

counsel for the respondent and after perusing the record I am proceeding to

decide these appeals.

3. There are two appellants, and who were the applicants before the

Railway Claims Tribunal. Appellant No.1/applicant No.1 is the husband of

the deceased Smt.Meera Devi and the father of the two deceased minor

children Baby Palak and Master Abhijit. Appellant No.2/applicant No.2 is

the son of applicant No.1/appellant No.1 as also of the deceased Smt.Meera

Devi and the brother of deceased Baby Palak and Master Abhijit.

4. The case pleaded by the appellants/applicants was that Smt.Meera

Devi along with Baby Palak and Master Abhijit died in an untoward incident

on account of falling from the train Himalayan Queen Express on 28.3.2010.

Three claim petitions were therefore filed seeking statutory compensation

under the Railways Act, 1989. Compensation is statutorily fixed at Rs.4

lakhs for death of each bona fide passenger. In the claim petition, it was

stated that the deceased Smt. Meera Devi along with three children Baby

Palak, Master Abhijit and Master Abhishek were travelling by Himalayan

Queen Express from Chandigarh on 28.3.2010 when deceased Smt. Meera FAO Nos.557/2011 & conn. matters page 2 of 5 Devi near Dhol Mazra railway station went to the toilet for cleaning Master

Abhijit but Baby Palak also went behind her whereas Master Abhishek

remained on the seat, when due to sudden jerk of the train the three persons

Smt.Meera Devi, Baby Palak and Master Abhijit fell down from the train

resulting in their death.

5. The Railway Claims Tribunal has dismissed the claim petitions by

making the following salient observations:

(i) If really Master Abhijit had fallen down first then there was no reason

why Smt.Meera Devi would have not tried to pull the chain and stop the

train.

(ii) The bodies of the three deceased persons Smt.Meera Devi, Baby

Palak and Master Abhijit were not found lying together but they were found

lying one after the other within a distance of 100-120 mtrs. showing that the

children have been thrown out one by one and Smt.Meera Devi thereafter

jumped from the train.

(iii) The death of the three persons is not on account of untoward incident

but is on account of committing suicide and which becomes clear from the

fact that the deceased Smt. Meera Devi left her home in Baddi (H.P.) even

without informing her husband that she was leaving for her native place in

Bihar and her husband came to know of her departure with the children only FAO Nos.557/2011 & conn. matters page 3 of 5 when he came back from the office for lunch in the afternoon. The Tribunal

has rightly held that it is unbelievable for a mother, that too of three small

children, to leave her home from Baddi, Himachal Pradesh to Chapra in

Bihar without informing her husband. Also, if the deceased was travelling

to Delhi with her three minor children, there was no reason that Smt.Meera

Devi/deceased would not inform her brother who was living at Delhi.

(iv) No travel tickets were found in possession of the deceased Smt.Meera

Devi either for her travel or for the travel of the children and only a sum of

Rs.100/- was recovered during the search.

(v) There was no reason why the deceased would have commenced

journey, instead of from Kalka which is a railway head for Baddi in

Himachal Pradesh, but from Chandigarh which is much further away.

6. In my opinion, sympathy on account of deaths of a mother and her

children in such cases should not be allowed to cloud the judgment of this

Court where the statute fixes a statutory compensation of Rs.4 lakhs for

death of each person travelling in a train. Statutory compensation is given

for deaths of bonafide passengers on account of an untoward incident, and

statutory compensation is specifically excluded by virtue of Section 123(c)

read with Section 124 (A) of the Railways Act, 1989 once it is found that the

deaths have taken place on account of self inflicted injuries/suicides.

FAO Nos.557/2011 & conn. matters page 4 of 5

7. A civil case is decided on principle of preponderance of probabilities,

and in the present case it is clear that the deaths of all the three persons

namely Smt.Meera Devi, Baby Palak and Master Abhijit have occurred not

on account of an untoward incident but was the case of a suicide.

8. In view of the above there is no merit in these appeals and the same

are therefore dismissed, leaving parties to bear their own costs.

                                              VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J
FEBRUARY 10, 2014
mm




FAO Nos.557/2011 & conn. matters                                    page 5 of 5