N.Daivanayagi vs The Union Of India Owning
2021 Latest Caselaw 4528 Mad

                                                                             C.M.A.No.2728 of 2016

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED : 22.02.2021

                                                       CORAM

                            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

                                                C.M.A.No.2728 of 2016

                     1.N.Daivanayagi
                     2.N.Durairajan
                     3.N.Indhumathi(Minor)
                     Appellant 3, rep.by Mother and
                     Natural Guardian, Appellant-1.                              ..Appellants

                                                         Vs.

                     The Union of India owning
                     Southern Railways,
                     Rep.by its General Manager,
                     Chennai – 600 003.                                          ..Respondent

                     (Cause title accepted vide court order
                     dated 15.04.2016 made in C.M.P.No.3362/16
                     in CMA.SR.No.59012 of 2015)

                     Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 23 of the
                     Railway Claims Tribunal, against the judgment in O.A.(II-U) 66/2013
                     on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench, dated
                     03.03.2015 in dismissing the Original Application, filed by the
                     Appellants, claiming compensation of Rs.4 lakhs, for the death of the
                     deceased Natarajan, the husband and the father of the 1st and 2 & 3
                     appellants herein, respectively.

                                      For Appellants   : Mr.R.Venkatajalapathy

                                      For Respondent   : Mr.C.V.Ramachandramurthy

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


                     1/6
                                                                               C.M.A.No.2728 of 2016

                                                   JUDGMENT

The judgment dated 03.03.2015 passed in O.A.(II-U) 66/2013 is

under challenge in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

2. The claimants are the appellants and the application was filed

under Section 16 of the Railways Act on the ground that the deceased

Mr.Natarajan was a Driver in Private Lorry Agency. He had travelled to

Chennai on 19.01.2012 by train name, Tiruchendure Express in General

Coach No.92456 SR. During the travel time, he handed over his

baggage to co-traveller and he went to bathroom. However, after a long

time, he had not returned back. The train was running in between

Dindugal and Trichi Stations, the toilet door was closed. Unfortunately,

it was informed that no mechanics are available to open the door in a

running train. When the train reached Egmore, thereafter they opened

the door and found that the said Natarajan, who was a bonafide

passenger died.

3. Post-mortem Report reveals that the passenger died and the

Divisional Railway Manager [DRM] Report states that it was a natural

death. Even the Final Report filed by the Sub Inspector of Police, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

C.M.A.No.2728 of 2016

Railway Police Station, Egmore states that after investigation and

inspecting the scene of occurrence, it was found that the death of the

passenger was a natural death and he was a bonafide passenger.

4. Both the Investigation Report as well as the Divisional Railway

Manager [DRM] Report reveals that it was a natural death. No injury

was found in the dead body. However, it was an admitted fact that the

deceased was a bonafide passenger.

5. Section 153 of the Railways Act enumerates that if any

untoward incident occurs, then alone the claimants are entitled for

compensation. In the present case, it was established by the Railway

Authorities that it was a natural death and therefore, the Tribunal arrived

a conclusion that the appellants are not entitled for compensation. The

Tribunal with reference to Section 123 and Section 124A of the

Railways Act, made a finding that the appellants could not able to

establish that the untoward incident occurred. In the absence of any such

factum, the compensation cannot be granted under the Statute.

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

C.M.A.No.2728 of 2016

6. The Tribunal considered the facts and circumstances as well as

the deposition of the witnesses. Even the eye witnesses A.W.1 and

A.W.2 had narrated the facts. There was no external or internal injuries

anywhere on the body and further, it was found that the deceased would

appear to have died of the effects of coronary heart decease and natural

cause. This being the categorical findings of the Tribunal, this Court do

not find any infirmity or perversity as such.

7. Accordingly, the judgment dated 03.03.2015 passed in O.A.(II-

U) 66/2013 stands confirmed and consequently, the Civil Miscellaneous

Appeal in C.M.A.No.2728 of 2016 is dismissed. No costs.

22.02.2021

kak Index: Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking order

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

C.M.A.No.2728 of 2016

To

1. The Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench.

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

C.M.A.No.2728 of 2016

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

kak

C.M.A.No.2728 of 2016

22.02.2021

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