Delhi High Court
Union Of India vs Mithlesh & Ors. on 12 April, 2018
$~24
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 12.04.2018
+ FAO 170/2017 & C.M.No. 14642/2017
UNION OF INDIA ..... Appellant
Through: Ms. Shipra Shukla, Advocate.
Versus
MITHLESH & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Ajit Rajput, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
NAJMI WAZIRI, J (Oral)
1. This appeal impugns an order dated 20.12.2016 passed by the
Railway Claims Tribunal (Tribunal), Delhi, granting compensation to the
respondents-claimants on account of death of Mr. Sukhveer Singh, the
husband, father and son of the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 respectively. The
Tribunal found the claim of the respondents valid and having been proven;
that the deceased Mr. Sukhveer Singh with a valid ticket No.W75079416 for
Rs.20/- had boarded a crowded train from Okhla to Mathura; that the only
place he had for standing near the gate of the train compartment; that he fell
down due to a sudden movement and violent jerk; that he received serious
injuries all over his body. He was taken to AIIMS, where he succumbed to
his injuries. The valid passenger ticket was produced and given to the
FAO 170/2017 Page 1 of 5
appellants. The contentions of the Railways that the deceased was not a
bona fide passenger but a person seeking to relieve himself on or near the
Railway tracks were found implausible because the deceased was a resident
of Friends Colony, New Delhi, which was about three kilometres away from
the accident site. The Tribunal found no reason as to why he would cross
the track to the place where the body was found. The Tribunal also found it
proven that the deceased had a ticket from Delhi to Kosi Kalan, which is a
mid point on the way to Mathura. The Tribunal found it to be a plausible
and rational explanation since Kosi Kalan is the place from where the
onward journey to Mathura could have been undertaken, therefore, the
theory of the ticket having been planted, was disbelieved, because if the
appellant's plea of fabricated ticket was to be accepted, then the person so
fabricating it could have produced a ticket all the way upto Mathura as well.
Apropos whether the nature of injuries suffered by the deceased could be on
account of a fall from the train, the Tribunal concluded in the affirmative
and reasoned as under:-
"3.........There is a little doubt about the fact that it was only
a train accident and he had not been dragged to the station
as a dead body. The nature of injuries would show that he
had grievous injuries on the body which is compatible with
a fall from the train. There had been fracture of multiple
ribs of the right side with extravasations of blood in soft
tissues. There had been extravasations of blood under right
temporal region. It is significant that the body was not cut
into pieces and all the injuries are quite possible by a
person falling from the train. If it was a tall from the train,
the Train Register as well as the evidence of Aman himself
will lend support to the tact that he could have travelled by
EMU train that left Okhla at 4:58 AM.......".
FAO 170/2017 Page 2 of 5
2. Since the two crucial and relevant aspects were proven by the
claimants i.e. the deceased was a bona fide passenger with a valid ticket and
that the nature of injuries and the attendant evidence showed that he had
suffered fatal injuries on account of a fall from the train, the claim was
allowed. A sum of Rs.4.00 lakhs was awarded as compensation. The said
amount has been deposited in the Court and kept in an FDR. No monies
have been released to the claimants despite their loss having occurred in
2013.
3. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that the DRM
Enquiry was initiated in 2016 for an accident which occurred three years
earlier. The Court is of the view that the said DRM Report would be of no
consequence since all the relevant material would have been obliterated by
that time. It could at best be an empty formality. For a DRM report in a
railway accident, the inquiry ought to have been initiated immediately and
not later than a day or two of the information of the accident/ untoward
incident. Some form of inquiry which is started after three years of the
untoward incident, can only rely on the records and extrapolate on the same.
Such explanation can attempt to persuade but it would be of no evidentiary
value. Reference is made to the decision of the Supreme Court dated
25.04.2017 in Civil Appeal No. 5608/2017, titled: Kalandi Charan Sahoo
& Anr. vs General Manager, South-East Central Railways, Bilaspur.
4. The learned counsel for the respondents states that the compensation
so awarded has not been released to the respondent despite the claim having
been made in 2015. He further states that in a similar appeal by the Union
of India challenging the award of compensation by the Tribunal, the Court
FAO 170/2017 Page 3 of 5
while referring to the dicta of the Supreme Court in Rathi Menon vs. Union
of India, (2001) 3 SCC 714, which has been followed by the Division Bench
of the Calcutta High Court in Bandana Mishra vs UOI (2017) ACE 484
(DB) (Cal.) re-iterated the well settled principle that the appeal is the
continuation of the claim petition and the power of the Appellate Court is
co-extensive with that of the Claims Tribunal. Referring to Sardar
Tajender Singh Gambhir vs. Sardar Gurpreet Singh, 2014 (10) SCC 702
and the principles of Rathi Menon (supra), the Court enhanced the
compensation on the revised Schedule applicable to the Railway Accidents
and Untoward Incidents (Compensation) Amendment Rules, 2016, as was
applicable on the date of the decision by the High Court.
5. The current Schedule to the aforesaid Rules specifies a compensation
amount of Rs.8,00,000/- on account of death due to railway accident. The
Tribunal's reasoning for the conclusions arrived at does not call for any
interference.
6. At the behest of the appellant, there has been a stay on the disbursal of
the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal on 20.12.2016. The
proceedings are a continuation of the claim petition. The claim has to be
allowed but the compensation must be in consonance with the
aforementioned revised Schedule which specifies an amount of Rs.8.00
lakhs for fatality in a railway accident.
7. Accordingly, the amount payable to the claimants would be Rs.
8,00,000/- alongwith interest @ of 9% per annum on Rs. 4,00,000/- from the
date of filing of the claim petition and interest @ of 9% per annum from
today. In terms of the ratio of division of the compensation indicated in the
Award, a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- will be payable to the mother and Rs.
FAO 170/2017 Page 4 of 5
3,00,000/- each will go to the widow and son of the deceased. From the
amount deposited by the appellant, Rs. 75,000/- shall be paid to the mother
and Rs. 1 lac to the widow in their respective bank account maintained near
their place of residence. The remaining amounts of each party shall be kept
in an interest bearing FDRs of Rs. 75,000/- each or part thereof to mature
every successive year to enure to the benefit of the parties concerned. Upon
maturity of such FDRs the principle amount along with interest shall be paid
into the account of the parties concerned. Should the parties require monies
for exigencies, it will always be open to them to approach the Court for
directions. The additional amount of Rs. 4 lacs, along with interest accrued
thereon hereinabove, shall be deposited and kept in FDRs in terms of the
above within four weeks from today.
8. The appeal alongwith pending application stands disposed off in the
above terms.
NAJMI WAZIRI, J.
APRIL 12, 2018
sb
