Union Of India vs Smt. Ramraji Ahirwar
2022 Latest Caselaw 13007 MP

                                                       1
                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                 AT JABALPUR
                                                         BEFORE
                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR SHARMA
                                             ON THE 27th OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

                                            MISC. APPEAL No. 1781 of 2016

                                 BETWEEN:-
                                 UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE GENERAL
                                 MANAGER WESTERN CENTRAL RAILWAY,
                                 JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                  .....PETITIONER
                                 (BY SHRI R.K. JAISWAL, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
                                 APPELLANT/UNION OF INDIA. )

                                 AND
                                 SMT. RAMRAJI AHIRWAR W/O LATE SHRI
                                 GURUCHARAN     AHAIRWAR R/O VILLAGE
                                 BHAGWAT     NAGAR,    PARASIYA,   LOK
                                 VIDHYAPEETH       NAGAR,      FARENDA,
                                 MAHARAJGANJ U.P (UTTAR PRADESH)

                                                                                .....RESPONDENTS
                                 (BY SHRI HAFIQULLAH, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
                                 RESPONDENT. )

                               This appeal coming on for hearing this day, the court passed
                          the following:
                                                       ORDER

Heard.

Appellant has preferred present appeal under Section 23 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 feeling aggrieved by order dated 05/05/2016 passed by Railway Claims Tribunal, Bhopal in Claim Case No.OA-IIa/BPL/2011/0357, whereby learned Tribunal awarded Rs.4,00,000/- as compensation to the respondent on account of death

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SANTOSH KUMAR TIWARI Signing time: 9/30/2022 6:02:22 PM

of her son in train accident.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the son of respondent was traveling in open door of train, therefore, he fell down from the train, due to his negligence, hence, appellant is not liable to pay compensation to the respondent. It is also submitted that learned Tribunal ignored the D.R.M. Report as well as statement of co- passenger Rajesh Paul, who clearly stated that at the time of alleged incident, the deceased was sitting near the open door of the compartment, therefore, he fell down, due to his own negligence. Under

these circumstances, learned counsel for the appellant prays for setting aside of the impugned award.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent opposed the contention raised by learned counsel for the appellant by contending that at the time of alleged incident, son of respondent was traveling from train No. 1016-UP-Kushinagar Express from Gorakhpur to Pune with valid general ticket No. 65988968, therefore, the Railway Claims Tribunal has not committed any error in awarding compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- in her favour. Under these circumstances, learned counsel for the respondent prays for dismissal of the appeal. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the respondent has placed on the judgement of Hon'ble apex Court in the case of Jameela & Ors. Vs. Union of India, AIR 2010 SCC 3705.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SANTOSH KUMAR TIWARI Signing time: 9/30/2022 6:02:22 PM

documents available on record.

The Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Baldev Raikwar versus Union of India 2013 (2) M.P.H.T 62 , has held that where there is evidence that the deceased had purchased the requisite ticket and there was no evidence in rebuttal then the burden is on the Railway Administration to prove that the deceased was not a bonafide passenger and since this burden was not discharged by the Railway Administration, the Court held that the deceased was a bonafide passenger.

In the case of Union of India Vs. Prabhakaran Vijaya Kumar and others (2008) 9 SCC 527, it is held that the Railway Administration is liable to pay compensation for untoward incident because it will not make any difference whether deceased was actually inside the train or trying to get in such train when fell down. It is held that falling down of a bonafide passenger that is a passenger travelling with a valid ticket while getting off the train or while trying to board it will be an untoward incident.

It is further held that Section 124-A of the Railways Act 1989

places on railways strict liability for no fault liability in case of railway accident. Hence, if case comes within purview of an untoward incident, it is wholly irrelevant as to who was at fault.

Thus, if victim died as a result of accidentally falling from a train, the victim is covered within the meaning of untoward incident for Signature Not Verified Signed by: SANTOSH KUMAR TIWARI Signing time: 9/30/2022 6:02:22 PM

which Railway is liable to compensate the dependents of the victim.

Similarly, it held that standing at open door of the compartment of the running train may be negligent and rash act but it is not a criminal act. It is the responsible of the Railways to provide accommodation in the compartments to all the passengers holding a valid ticket and take measures to open and close the doors on platforms.

Section 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989 which deals with compensation on account of untoward incident provides certain exceptions where no compensation shall be payable namely suicide or attempted suicide by him and which reads as under :-

(a) suicide or attempted suicide by him ;

(b) self-inflicted injury ;

(c) his own criminal act ;

(d) any act committed by him in a state of intoxication or insanity;

(e) any natural cause or disease or medical or surgical treatment unless such treatment becomes necessary due to injury caused by the said untoward incident.

In this regard, the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Rina Devi 2018 AIR (SC) 2362 is relevant where it is held that in terms of Section 101 of the Evidence Act 1872, "Death or injury in course of boarding or de-boarding train will be "untoward incident". Victim will be entitled to compensation and will not fall under proviso to section 124A merely on plea of negligence of victim as contributing factor."

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SANTOSH KUMAR TIWARI Signing time: 9/30/2022 6:02:22 PM

In the case of Union of India Vs. Anuradha and another reported in 2014 ACJ 856, the Court has held that :

"Even the deceased boarded in a wrong train having a valid journey ticket and died while alighting the train that does not mean that he was not a bonadide passenger and on that ground claim cannot be rejected."

In view of judgments cited above and looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, in the considered opinion of this Court, learned Railway Claims Tribunal has not committed any illegality or perversity in awarding compensation to the respondent, which required any interference by this Court. Accordingly, being devoid of any merits present appeal deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. So far as the judgment cited by learned counsel for the respondent is concerned, it is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

Let a copy of this order alongwith record be sent to the Railway Claims Tribunal Bhopal for information and necessary compliance.

(ARUN KUMAR SHARMA) JUDGE skt

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SANTOSH KUMAR TIWARI Signing time: 9/30/2022 6:02:22 PM