Madras High Court
A.Sumathi vs The Union Of India on 23 February, 2021
C.M.A.No.828 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.02.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
C.M.A.No.828 of 2015
1.A.Sumathi
2.N.Anbalagan ..Appellants
Vs.
The Union of India
Owning the Southern Railway,
Rep.by General Manager,
Chennai – 600 003. ..Respondent
Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 23 of the
Railway Claims Tribunal, against the order dated 19.12.2014 passed by
the Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench, in OA(II-U) 85/2014.
For Appellants : Mr.T.Raja Mohan
For Respondent : M/s.T.P.Savitha
JUDGMENT
The order dated 19.12.2014 passed in OA(II-U) 85/2014 is under
challenge in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
2. The claimants are the appellants and the Claim Petition is filed
under Section 16 of the Railways Act on the ground that on 26.01.2014
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
prior to 16.55 hrs when the deceased was returning from Avadi, while
C.M.A.No.828 of 2015
he was travelling in EMU train, which was proceeding towards Chennai,
had accidentally fallen down from the running train near Ambattur
Railway Station, at KM 16/15-16A nearby up slow line thereby
sustained grievous injury on the back of head, both legs were broken
and died at the place of accident.
3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants
mainly contended that the Divisional Railway Managers' [DRM] Report
as well as the documents relied on by the Railway authorities and the
Tribunal are presumptive and the Railways could not able to establish
that it is a case of trespass, in view of the fact that it was not established
by the Railways regarding trespass, the claimants are entitled for
compensation.
4. The First Information Report registered on 26.01.2014. Ex.A1
reveals that the Station Master conveyed through walkie talkie that two
dead bodies near up slow line home signal at KM 16/15 were found.
However, there was no information stating that the deceased were
travelling in any of the train or fallen down from the running train. No
ticket was retrieved from the dead body and the appellants also could
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
not able to establish that the deceased was in possession of a valid travel
C.M.A.No.828 of 2015
ticket. Thus, the very F.I.R itself is not supportive of the
appellants/claimants. If at all, it is a case of fallen down from a train,
some co-passengers could have noticed or could have stopped the train
and in this case, nothing of that happened. Contrarily, the Station Master
through walkie talkie, informed that two dead bodies were found. The
DRM Report filed after investigation also reveals that it is a case of
trespass and not a fallen down case as stated by the Police in the Final
Report. If at all, it is a fallen down case, the traveling public or the
people living adjacent to the Railway track would have informed to any
Railway Authority. However, no such information was given to any one
of the Railway authority. Thus, the Report was filed, holding that it was
a case of trespass.
5. This Court is of the considered opinion that even the statement
the F.I.R as well as the Final Report are not corroborating. When the
details regarding the accident are not notified and the Station Master
merely informed that two dead bodies were found and there was no clear
evidence to establish that the deceased was a bonafide passenger
traveling in a train and the accident occurred due to falling down from a
running train, there is no reason to arrive a conclusion that it is a case of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
an untoward incident.
C.M.A.No.828 of 2015
6. The Railway Claims Tribunal adjudicated the issues with
reference to the documents and the evidences available and the findings
in this regard are made clear in Paragraph 6.2 of the order, which reads
as under:
“6.2. It is seen from the records that police took up
investigation after receipt of the message from the Station
Master / ABU based on which FIR as per Exh.A-1 was
registered. It is seen from this document that two male
bodies one aged about 60 years and another aged about
20 years were lying at Km.16/15 Ambattur yard up slow
line as conveyed by motorman of 43122 at 16.55 hours.
Inquest was drawn as per Exh.A-4. In the final report as
per Exh.A-5, it is recorded by the Police that on
26.01.2014 before 16.55 hours, the deceased while
returning from Avadi by an unknown train accidentally
fell down at Km.16/15-16A on up slow line near Ambattur
Railway station, sustained injuries and died at the spot
and the police have treated the case as accidental death
due to fall down. It is pertinent to point out that in the
inquest and final reports, it is mentioned that the deceased
might have fallen down from a running train prior to
16.55 hours of 26.01.2014 while in the English
translation filed by the learned counsel for the applicants,
he has stated that the incident happened at 16.55 hours
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
which was the time at which Motorman saw the two dead
C.M.A.No.828 of 2015
bodies on the spot in question. Thus as can be seen from
the records, it is made very clear that there was on eye
witness to the alleged incident and lying of the bodies at
the spot in question were noticed by the Motorman of
43122 at 16.55 hours.”
7. In view of the facts and circumstances, this Court do not find
any infirmity or perversity in respect of the decision arrived by the
Railway Claims Tribunal and consequently, the order dated 19.12.2014
passed in OA(II-U) 85/2014 stands confirmed. Accordingly, the Civil
Miscellaneous Appeal in C.M.A.No.828 of 2015 is dismissed. No costs.
23.02.2021
kak
Index: Yes/No
Internet:Yes/Non-Speaking order
To
1. The Railway Claims Tribunal,
Chennai Bench, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
C.M.A.No.828 of 2015
kak
C.M.A.No.828 of 2015
23.02.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
