Monday, 04, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Sekar vs The Union Of India Owning
2021 Latest Caselaw 4326 Mad

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 4326 Mad
Judgement Date : 19 February, 2021

Madras High Court
Sekar vs The Union Of India Owning on 19 February, 2021
                                                                               C.M.A.No.2957 of 2019


                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED : 19.02.2021

                                                       CORAM

                                   THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

                                                C.M.A.No.2957 of 2019

                     Sekar                                                      ..Appellant
                                                         Vs.
                     The Union of India owning,
                     Southern Railway, Rep.by its
                     General Manager,
                     Chennai – 600 003.                                        ..Respondent

                     Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 23 of Railway
                     Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 praying to set aside the order dated
                     26.04.2019 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench in
                     OA (II-U) No.122 of 2018, granting an award for the statutory
                     compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- with interest at 12% p.a., from the date of
                     filing of the claim application viz., 16.07.2018 till the date of payment
                     and the costs of the proceedings.


                                      For Appellant   : Mr.R.Sekaran

                                      For Respondent : M/s.T.P.Saritha




                     1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                 C.M.A.No.2957 of 2019


                                                  JUDGMENT

The judgment dated 26.04.2019 passed in OA (II-U) No.122 of

2018 is under challenge in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

2. The appellant is the claimant and the appeal is filed based on

the following facts that the deceased was a native of E.Ramanathapuram

Village of Lalkudi Taluk of Trichy District. He was unemployed. That

on 23.07.2017 in the night, he informed his father that he was going to

Chennai for an interview for a job at Singapore and left the house. The

applicant came to know from the Virudhachalam Railway Police that the

deceased, after attending the interview, in order to return, by purchasing

unreserved ticket on 24.07.2017 at about 09.30 p.m. boarded in Rockfort

Express and traveled in a general compartment. Prior to 03.00 hrs of

25.07.2017 when the train was proceeding between Sillakudi and

Kallagam Railway Stations at KM 282/00-01, due to speed, jerk and jolt

of the train, the deceased accidentally fell down from the running train,

suffered grievous head injury causing skull breakage and heavy

discharge of blood, died at the place of occurrence. The death was

noticed by the SSE/P way of Lalkudi R.S and reported for further action.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.2957 of 2019

It was an untoward incident. The II class ticket purchased by the

deceased for his travel from Chennai to Trichy was said to have lost at

the time of shifting him to hospital.

3. The Tribunal adjudicated the issues with reference to the

documents and evidences. The Tribunal considered the contradictions in

factual events and arrived a conclusion that the appellant / claimant had

not established that the deceased was a bonafide passenger and further

not established that an untoward incident within the meaning of the

Railways Act. The factual contradictions lead to serious doubt regarding

the untoward incident and accordingly, the Tribunal rejected the

application.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant made a submission that

the inquest report reveals that the accident occurred. The final report

also states that the accident occurred due of falling down from running

train. The postmortem report also reveals that the deceased sustained

fatal injuries and died. Therefore, the Tribunal committed an error in

rejecting the application.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.2957 of 2019

5. The learned counsel for the respondent / railways even raised a

doubt regarding the Final Investigation Report registered. As per the

copy of the F.I.R, it was registered on 25.07.2017 at 03.00 hrs.

However, contents of the F.I.R reveals that the information itself was

given by one Sekar on 26.07.2017 at about 18.00 hrs. Thus, there is a

serious doubt about the registration of F.I.R in accordance with the facts

and circumstances. Even assuming that the date is mistakenly stated as

26.07.2017, contents of the F.I.R reveals that the father of the deceased

himself found body of his son only on 26.07.2017 at about 03.00 hrs.

Entire reading of the F.I.R itself reveals that the contents recorded is

improper and therefore, there is a serious doubt even in registration of

F.I.R by the Police. The F.I.R as well as the contents in the F.I.R raised a

serious doubt and therefore, this Court cannot be trusted upon the

genuinity of F.I.R with reference to the facts and circumstances.

6. Mere inquest report alone cannot be relied upon to arrive a

conclusion. Inquest Report as well as Final Report must be corroborated

with the other evidences as well as the facts and circumstances. The

Tribunal considered all the documents as well as the deposition of the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.2957 of 2019

witnesses. The findings of the Tribunal reveals that the contentions of

the appellant/claimant are unable to believe in view of the fact that the

deceased had taken the train ticket on 24.07.2017 from Chennai for his

travel to native village. If he had undertaken such a journey, the body

would have been found lying at the place where it was later found right

from 03.00 hrs. When the train had passed Lalgudi, it is most unlikely

that the Railway Staff, who was doing patrolling duty did not see the

dead body the whole of 25.07.2017 and even the telephone details are

unable to be verified. Therefore, the Tribunal arrived a conclusion that

the unusual incident that the body has not been noticed during the whole

day on 25.07.2017 and seen only by the noon of 26.07.2017. Even the

tickets were also not retrieved.

7. This being the factum, the Tribunal considered the principles

laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Union

of India vs Rina Devi and rejected the application. Thus, this Court do

not find any perversity or infirmity as such in the finding of the

Tribunal.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.2957 of 2019

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

Pns

8. Accordingly, judgment dated 26.04.2019 passed in O.A.(II-U)

No.122 of 2018 stands confirmed. Consequently, C.M.A.No.2957 of

2019 stands dismissed. No costs.

19.02.2021

Pns

Index: Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking order/Non speaking order

To

1. The General Manager, Union of India owning, Southern Railway, Chennai – 600 003.

2. The Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench.

C.M.A.No.2957 of 2019

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter