Union Of India vs Roopchand
2023 Latest Caselaw 1972 MP

                                                                             1
                                         IN      THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                                    BEFORE
                                                      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                                             ON THE 3 rd OF FEBRUARY, 2023
                                                              MISC. APPEAL No. 1427 of 2019

                                        BETWEEN:-
                                        UNION OF INDIA THR. GENERAL MANAGER WEST
                                        CENTRAL RAILWAY JABALPUR M.P. (MADHYA
                                        PRADESH)

                                                                                                            .....APPELLANT
                                        (BY SHRI DEVESH BHOJNE - ADVOCATE )

                                        AND
                                        ROOPCHAND    S/O SHRI   SONATH R/O VILLAGE
                                        GANJAPUR ALIS BANGAR POST MANDAVAR (UTTAR
                                        PRADESH)

                                                                                                          .....RESPONDENT
                                        (BY SHRI ANUBHAV JAIN - ADVOATE)

                                               T h is appeal coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
                                        following:
                                                                              ORDER

This Miscellaneous appeal is filed by the Union of India, being aggrieved

of order dated 14.12.2018, passed by learned Technical Member Railway's Claims Tribunal, Bhopal Board in OA/IIU/BPL/280/2016, whereby, learned Claims Tribunal has awarded compensation in favour of the claimant Roopchand Son of Shri Sonath.

2. Shri Devesh Bhojne, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the act

Signature Not Verified of the claimant to de-board running train will come within the definition of self SAN

Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI inflicted injury and no claim is payable in case of a self inflicted injury as per the Date: 2023.02.08 17:26:15 IST

provisions contained in Section 124(A) of the Railways Act.

3. It is submitted that brief facts of the case are that claimant was travelling from Bijnor to Pune. At Bhopal station, he had boarded Chhattisgarh Express. As per the claimant, he was informed that Chhattisgarh Express was going towards the side of Jhansi, then he tried to de-board a running train. In the process, he lost his both the lower limbs. It is submitted that Tribunal has awarded compensation overlooking the provisions contained in Section 124(A) of the Railways Act, which casts an exception for payment of compensation and prevents liability of the Railway Administration, in case of a self inflicted injury. It is also submitted that claimant had only claimed Rs.4,00,000/- but learned Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.8,00,000/-, which is illegal and arbitrary.

4. Shri Shafiqulla, in his turn, submits that boarding a wrong train is not an act of criminal negligence. In case of Jameela and others Vs. Union of India [(2010) SC 3705], it is held that passenger falling down from running train while travelling on valid ticket, then fact that he was standing at open door of compartment of running train may be negligent act or even rash act, but it is certainly not criminal act. Negligence of passenger does not have effect on liability of Railways and claimants are entitled to compensation with interest. Thus, placing reliance on this judgment, it is submitted that claimant was a bonafide passenger travelling from Bijnor to Pune, he had boarded a wrong train for which when informed, he tried to de-board, but all of a sudden train started causing the accident. Thus, it will not fall within the exception clause provided under Section 124(A) of the Railways Act.

5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, Signature Not Verified SAN so also the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jameela and others Vs. Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI Date: 2023.02.08 17:26:15 IST Union of India (supra), I am of the opinion that act of the claimant to de-

board which he had boarded under a bonafide mistake, cannot be said to be an act of self inflicted injury and, therefore, learned Claims Tribunal has rightly allowed the Claim Petition. The objections raised by the appellant, Indian Railways, are not borne out from the record.

6. As far as quantum of compensation is concerned, after amendment in the quantum, Tribunal has awarded the quantum which was admissible on the date of the award and, therefore, there is no illegality in that too. Thus, on both the grounds, appellant has failed to make out a case for indulgence.

7. Appeal fails and is dismissed.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE A.Praj.

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI Date: 2023.02.08 17:26:15 IST