Delhi High Court
Shyam Bati & Anr. vs Union Of India on 8 February, 2018
$~8
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 08.02.2018
+ FAO 316/2017
SHYAM BATI & ANR. ..... Appellants
Through: Mr. Ajit Rajput and Mr. Raj Kumar
Rajput, Advocates
Versus
UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent
Through: Ms. Suvira Lal, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
NAJMI WAZIRI, J (Oral)
1. This appeal impugns the order dated 25.11.2016 of the Railway
Claims Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi declining the appellants' claim for
compensation, which was sought on account of the demise of one Rajvir in a
train accident on 21.12.2014.
2. The appellants, i.e. the widow and daughter of the deceased Rajvir,
had claimed that the latter was travelling in a train from Inchhapuri to Delhi
alongwith Rahul, a three year old boy. He had a valid ticket bearing No.
73272 for Rs.11/-, which is not disputed by the respondent/Railways. It is
alleged that due to heavy rush inside the train compartment, a sudden jerk
from inside the compartment resulted in the falling of the appellant from the
moving train due to which he received grievous injuries and died on the
spot. Intimation of this incident was given to the family members of the
deceased from his mobile phone. The child, Rahul was found with the
Police at Old Delhi Railway Station. The body of the deceased was
discovered at 6 am from the railway track and was taken to Aruna Asaf Ali
Government Hospital, where the post-mortem was conducted on
25.12.2014.
3. The claim was denied by the Railways on the ground that the fall had
occurred due to the negligence of the deceased passenger. The DRM report
admitted that the travel ticket was valid for the journey undertaken by the
deceased. The impugned order records:
"In DD No. IIA dated 22.12.2014, Ex.A-2 the ASI
Lalit Mohan in his report has recorded to the effect that
on receipt of information he reached the place of incident
at platform No.2 Down line foot over bridge Km 7/2 Patel
Nagar railway station Delhi and found an unknown dead
person aged about 25/30 yrs ....who was lying inside the
railway track cut from the stomach and on casual search
Rs.500/- and three railway ticket numbers 01836 and
01835 from Ichapuri to Gurgaon and third ticket No.
73272 from Ichhapuri to Delhi Jn were recovered. In the
death report, Ex.A-4 it. is recorded as 'train accident".
The Post mortem report, Ex. A-6 reveals that the cause of
death in this case in my opinion is shock and
haemorrhage due to severance of trunk consistent with
train track episode which is necessarily fatal. Lalit
Mohan, ASI in his letter Ex.A-13 has recorded that on
21.12.14 Rajvir.....was coming along with his brother in
law Rahul and who (Rahul) was found alone at Old Delhi
railway station and the dead body of Rajvir was found on
platform No.2 of Patel Nagar due to rail accident and
when the child was asked about the said incident then he
could only state about his name and the name of his
father"
4. From the above, it is evident that the deceased had come under the
wheels of the train. The three tickets recovered from his body were also
corroborated. The deceased was travelling with two other passengers, one
of whom was his brother-in-law, who had deposed that on his return from
the toilet in the moving train, the deceased fell-off the train because of a
thrust from inside the crowded compartment.
5. However, the impugned order doubted the veracity of the claimants'
case because Shyam Bati, widow of the deceased was informed about the
incident on 21.12.2014, however, the body was identified only on
25.12.2014. This time gap was considered crucial by the Tribunal, leading
to suspicion as to what the family members were doing during this period if
they had suffered such a major tragedy in the family.
6. The Court is of the view that the said lapse of a couple of days cannot
itself be fatal to the compensation claimed nor would it be caused to raise
any suspicion about the claim, because when the young wife of the 27 year
old deceased Rajvir received information about her missing three-year old
son and her untraceable husband, she must have been in a state of shock and
dismay. Later when she was informed that her husband had died in a
railway accident, her mental condition could not be expected to be such that
she would think rationally. In the first instance, she would have to bear the
dual shock of loss of her husband and the unknown status of her missing
son. These traumatic news, coupled with absence of wherewithal to reach
Delhi as soon as possible from her village to trace her son, and then
confronting her deceased husband's mortal remains would be a dreadful,
daunting and debilitating prospect for her. Nevertheless, she was united
with her son at Delhi on 22.12.2014 with the assistance of family members
and relatives and, thereafter, her husband's body was identified. In the
circumstances, the passage of three days in her travel to Delhi, tracing of the
child and identification of her husband's mortal remains, cannot be said to
be unwarranted and such lapse of time would not prejudice her claim.
7. Furthermore, the other ground for rejection of the claim was that the
documents placed on record did not show that the deceased fell down from
the train and received injuries. In this regard, para 4 of the Claim Petition
records that:
"4. That there was huge rush inside the train compartment
and when train reached Patel Nagar Railway Station he
informed his brother in law that he is going to toilet and after
returning from toilet he was standing at the gate of the train
compartment all of sudden train jerked violently and due to
this jerk he received a thrust from inside the train
compartment and fell down from the train and received
serious/ grievous injuries all over his body and died on the
spot."
8. The impugned order, evidently suffers an error apparent on the face of
the record. The Court is of the view that the occurrence of the death of the
said passenger on the railway tracks, who had a valid train passenger ticket,
stands established. In the circumstances, the exception under section 124-A
of the Railways Act, 1989 would not be available, and the appeal would
have to be allowed.
9. Accordingly, the appeal and the claim are allowed. As per the the
revised Schedule dated 22.12.2016 applicable to the Railway Accidents and
Untoward Incidents (Compensation) Amendment Rules, 2016, Rs.8.00 lacs
is allowed to be paid to the claimants from the date of the filing of the
petition till its realisation with interest @ 9% per annum. The said amount
shall be payable to the appellant within six weeks of receipt of this order in
the following manner - (i) Rs.1.00 lac shall be released in the first instance
into her bank account, which shall be at a bank near the place of her
residence; (ii) remaining amount shall be kept in an interest bearing FDR of
Rs.1.00 lac each, which would mature every successive year. This amount,
along with the interest accrued thereon shall be released into the bank
account of appellant no. 1 alongwith the interest accrued thereon. The
compensation amount as aforestated shall be deposited by the respondent in
UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch. The Manager of the said bank shall
disburse the said amount as directed hereinabove. Details of appellant's
bank account shall be furnished to the said Manager.
10. The appeal is disposed-off in the above terms.
NAJMI WAZIRI, J
FEBRUARY 08, 2018/acm
