Madras High Court
Easwari vs Union Of India on 19 February, 2021
C.M.A.No.1862 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.02.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
C.M.A.No.1862 of 2018
1.Easwari
2.Akash (Minor)
3.Abinaya (Minor)
4.Ramachandran
5.Lakshmi
Appellants 2 and 3 are rep.by their
mother and natural guardian, Easwari ..
Appellants
vs.
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, against the order dated 02.05.2018,
passed in O.A.(II-U).No.129 of 2017 on the file of the Railway
Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench.
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1862 of 2018
For Appellants : Mr.S.Parthasarathy
For Respondents : Mr.T.P.Savitha
ORDER
The order dated 02.05.2018 passed in O.A.(II-U).No.129 of 2017
is under challenge in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
2. The appellants are the claimants, who filed an application under
Section 16 of the Railways Act before the Tribunal on the ground that
on 13.05.2017, the first appellant, her husband and her mother come
to Chennai, Egmore for go to Sri Rangam and purchased train ticket.
During the travelling, the husband of the first appellant had
accidentally fallen down near Tindivananm Railway Station due to
high speed, Jolt and Jerk and sustained grievous head injuries and
subsequently, died. A criminal case was registered in Crime No.55 of
2017. Investigations were conducted. The wife of the deceased herself
made a statement that her husband was under the influence of alcohol
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1862 of 2018
while travelling in the train and she scolded him not to stand nearby
door. He had not listened the word of his wife and was sitting nearby
door in the running train and fell down and sustained injuries. The
statement of the wife of the deceased was considered by the tribunal.
The wife was examined as A.W.1 and she deposed as under:
“Chief Examination by Shri.G.Kandan
I have filed my proof affidavit of even date,with copy
supplied to counsel for respondent. Contents of which
may be read as part of my examination in chief. I pray
that documents filed today as well as on earlier
occasions, as narrated in my Proof Affidavit, be marked
as Exhibits A-1 to A-8.
Cross Examination by: Ms.R.Sathyabama
The incident occurred on 31.05.2017. I know to read
and write in Tamil. The Affidavit is signed by me. My
husband was a Plumber. I am not an eyewitness to the
incident. Co-passenger informed me after certain
distance about falling of a person from the train when it
was in motion. I pulled the chain to stop the train. After
pulling the chain, the Guard came and inquired and we
were not able to find my husband hence I was advised to
get down at the next station i.e., Tindivananm Railway
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1862 of 2018
Station to give a complaint. I have given the oral
complaint to the Station Master, which was accepted and
FIR was registered on that basis. The Station Master was
not knowing Tamil and hence, another person present,
who knew the vernacular language taken down the
complaint. I have given the complaint stating that my
husband was standing near the doorways. I asked him to
come inside for which he scolded me and he stood near
the doorways. Both the statements made before the
Station Master as well as the deposition made today are
the factual narration without containing any difference.
Statement signed by me on 27.01.2018, filed along with
DRM report bears my signature. In my statement made
by me before Station Master as well as written by ASI on
27.01.2018 annexed to DRM report refers that aspect
wherein it was also stated by me that on the date of
incident the deceased had consumed alcohol. My
husband was brought in the next available train. He was
taken to the local Hospital in an Ambulance and I
accompanied him in the Ambulance to Government
Hospital, Tindivanam. Subsequently, my husband was
shifted in an Ambulance to JIPMER, Puducherrry. Police
did not recover anything from my husband. I deny the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1862 of 2018
suggestion that he was not a bona fide passenger and
travelled negligently near the doorways and respondent
is not liable to pay any compensation. No journey ticket
was recovered from him though it was a combined ticket
for three adults. My two kids were also travelling with us,
who were 1 month and 3 years old respectively. Inquest
report filed did not include my name”.
3. The Divisional Railway Manager report also relied upon by the
Tribunal. As per the Divisional Railway Manager report, the deceased
was under the influence of alcohol on the date of travelling. Further,
none of the family members holding a valid travel ticket. Even the
wife of the deceased and other passengers accompanied could not
able to trace any travel ticket and accordingly, the Tribunal arrived a
conclusion that they are not the bona fide passengers. Even under
Section 124 (exclusion clause), travelling with the influence of
alcohol is also a disentitlement for the compensation. The Tribunal
elaborately adjudicated the facts and circumstances and rejected the
application on the ground that the deceased was under the influence
of alcohol and further, the appellants were unable to establish that
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1862 of 2018
they are the bona fide passengers.
4. This being the factum, this Court do not find any acceptable
ground for the purpose of interfering with the findings of the order
passed by the tribunal. Accordingly, the judgment dated 02.05.2018
passed in O.A.(II-U).No.129 of 2017 stands confirmed and
consequently, Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs.
19.02.2021
ssb
Index: Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Speaking order/Non-Speaking Order
To
The Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.M.A.No.1862 of 2018
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
ssb
C.M.A.No.1862 of 2018
19.02.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
