Jothilakshmi(Wife Of The ... vs The Union Of India
2021 Latest Caselaw 4740 Mad

                                                                             C.M.A.No.4485 of 2019

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED : 23.02.2021

                                                       CORAM

                            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

                                                C.M.A.No.4485 of 2019

                     1.Jothilakshmi(wife of the deceased)
                     2.Sanjai Saravanan(minor son of deceased)
                     3.Deepak Shanmugam(minor son of deceased)
                     4.Thilagam(mother of the deceased)                         ..Appellants

                                                         Vs.

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

                     Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 23 of the
                     Railway Claims Tribunal, against the order dated 11.09.2019 made in
                     OA(IIu/MAS/204/2018 by Hon'ble Member (Technical) of the Railway
                     Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Chennai.

                                      For Appellants   : Mr.N.Dhanasekaran

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




                                                   JUDGMENT

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

C.M.A.No.4485 of 2019

The order dated 11.09.2019 passed in OA(IIu/MAS/204/2018) 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. The claimants, even in their

application, categorically states regarding the brief particulars of the

accident, indicating the day and place of accident and the name of the

train involved. The brief particulars of untoward incident also explain

that it is relevant to note down that the particulars of untoward incident

narrated in the application filed by the appellants reveals that "Natural

Death due to cardiac arrest while performing the journey on 28.12.2017

at Jolarpettai Junction at about 02.05 a.m.” Therefore, the question

arises whether such natural death can be construed as an 'Untoward

incident' within the meaning of Section 123 of the Railways Act.

3. The Railway Claims Tribunal adjudicated the facts and

circumstances. The findings of the Railway Tribunal clearly states that it

is a natural death due to cardiac arrest even as per the claimants. When

the claimants themselves admitted that it is a natural death, there is no

reason to arrive a conclusion that the death is an 'Untoward incident' https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

C.M.A.No.4485 of 2019

within the meaning of Section 123 of the Railways Act.

4. This Court is of the considered opinion that the Courts have

held that natural death cannot be brought under the meaning of an

'Untoward incident' under Section 123 of the Railways Act and

compensation cannot be granted. This being the principles laid down by

the Courts, this Court do not find any infirmity or perversity in respect of

the order of rejection of the application passed by the Railway Claims

Tribunal.

5. Accordingly, the order dated 11.09.2019 passed in

OA(IIu/MAS/204/2018) stands confirmed and the Civil Miscellaneous

Appeal in C.M.A.No.4485 of 2019 is dismissed. No costs.

23.02.2021

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

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

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

C.M.A.No.4485 of 2019

kak

To

1. The Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Chennai.

C.M.A.No.4485 of 2019

23.02.2021

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