The appellants appealed against the rejection of a death claim arising from a railway accident. The High Court dismissed the appeal, finding no evidence that the deceased was a bona fide passenger on the train in question, as the body was found before the train arrived.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
fa857.2022
2024:BHC-NAG:283
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
FIRST APPEAL NO.857/2022
Apl. Nos.1, 2 and 4 R/o Bharadi Wada, at P.O. Anjale (Bhalod), Ta. Yaval, ... Dist. Jalgaon (M.S.) 425304. Appellants - Versus - Union of India, through General Manager, Central Railway CSMT, Mumbai. ... Respondent
Ms. Sumesha Chaudhari, Advocate for the Appellants. Ms. Neerja G. Chaubey, Advocate for the Respondent.
CORAM :- MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J. DATE OF RESERVING THE JUDGMENT :- 30.10.2023 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE JUDGMENT :- 9.1.2024
JUDGMENT
Being aggrieved by the judgment passed by the
Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur in O.A. No.(IIu)/No.NGP/33/2019 dated 22.4.2022 dismissing the
2 fa857.2022
death claim of the deceased Janrao in railway accident, the claimants have filed the present appeal.
3 fa857.2022
4 fa857.2022
Tribunal has not considered the evidence of the co-passenger who is the son of the deceased. He was having valid ticket for travelling. His evidence is not considered and only on the evidence of the railway persons the judgment was passed rejecting the claim of the claimants.
(i) Whether the Railway Claims Tribunal is justified in rejecting the claim of claimants for compensation?
no dispute that the body was found on the track at KM No.443/1-3 prior to one K.M. to Bhusawal Railway Station. Whether the death of deceased is caused in an “untoward incident” is required to be seen. Before entering into merits of the case, it is necessary to see the definition of “untoward incident” under Section 123(c) of Railways Act which is as under:-
Section 1231 [(c) “untoward incident” means-(1) (i) the commission of a terrorist act within the meaning of sub-section (1) of section 3 of the
1 Inserted by Act 28 of 1994, S.2(w.e.f.1-8-1994).
fa857.2022
5
Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (28 of 1987); or
(ii) the making of a violent attack or the commission of robbery or dacoity; or (iii) the indulging in rioting, shoot-out or arson, by any person in or on any train carrying passengers, or in a waiting hall, cloak room or reservation or booking office or on any platform or in any other place within the precincts of a railway station; or
(2) the accidental falling of any passenger from a train carrying passengers.]”
was travelling from Tapti Ganga Express Train from Surat to Bhusawal on 7.11.2018. The falling from the train was noticed by the Loco Pilot of Train No.12534 of Pushpak Express. He has informed it on walkie-talkie. As per his evidence R.W.2 Ganesh Namdeorao Kshirsagar he saw the body at 15.27 Hrs. at KM N0.443/1-3. The location is just one Kilometre prior to the arrival of Bhusawal Station. Another witness, the R.P.F. staff Shri Shailendra Bachchav, is also examined by the respondent. He has seen the body at 15.40 Hrs. and reported the matter to the Station Master. The memo had been issued by the Deputy S.M. to G.R.P./R.P.F. Shri Ramanlal Lad (R.W.1) Loco Pilot of Train
6 fa857.2022
No.19045 Tapti Ganga Express has been examined who adduced evidence to the effect that Train No.19045 arrived at Bhusawal Station at 15.45. Hrs. and there was no jerk reported in the train neither there was any ACP or falling down of any passenger reported by any person. The body was found even before the train reached on the spot.
7 fa857.2022
travelling by said train but the facts brought on record by Railway authority occurrence of body even before arrival of train on said spot clearly proves that the deceased was not travelling by said train. The travelling of deceased by said train itself is not proved and no such incident is reported by any of the passenger who were travelling from said train. Therefore, the learned Tribunal has rightly considered the documentary and oral evidence on record and rejected the claim petition. For the aforesaid reasons, the appeal stands dismissed with no orders as to costs.
(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.)
Tambaskar.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Railway Claims Tribunal was justified in rejecting the claim for compensation?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Chamelibai
Vijay
Kavita
Vinod
Union of India
Vrushali V. Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
