High Court dismissed an appeal against the Railway Claims Tribunal's rejection of a death claim. The court held the appellant failed to prove the deceased was a bona fide passenger with a valid ticket, distinguishing the case from Rina Devi.
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.1798 of 2013 dismissed with no order as to costs.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.01.2020
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
C.M.A.No.1798 of 2013
1.S.R.Vijayakumar
2.Smt.V.Santhi ... Appellants/Applicants vs. The Union of India owning Southern Railway Rep. by its General Manager Chennai ... Respondent/Respondent
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 123 of the Indian Railways Act, against the order dated 14.09.2010 made in O.A. No.13 of 2010 on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench and set aside the same.
For Appellant : Mr.M.Selvam
For Respondent : Ms.T.P.Savitha
J U D G M E N T
The appellant has come forward with the present appeal challenging the order of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench dated 14.09.2010 made in O.A. No.13 of 2010, wherein the claim was rejected.
"29. We thus hold that mere presence of a body on the railway premises will not be conclusive to hold that injured or deceased was a bona fide passenger for which claim for compensation could be maintained. However, mere absence of ticket with such injured or deceased will not negative the claim that he was a bona fide passenger. Initial burden will be on the claimant which can be discharged by filing an affidavit of the relevant facts and burden will then shift on the Railways and the issue can be decided on the facts shown or the attending circumstances. This will have to be dealt with from case to case on the basis of facts found. The legal position in this regard will stand explained accordingly."
Paragraph 29 of the judgment cannot also be lost sight of.
However, there shall be no order as to cost.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS V)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
Asr
To
The Vice Chairman (Judicial)
The Railway Claims Tribunal,
Chennai Bench
Copy To
The Section Officer,
VR Section, High Court,
Madras-104.
C.M.A.No.1798 of 2013
VGI(CO)
CS/29/05/2020
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the absence of a valid ticket negates the claim when the deceased might have travelled on the train.
Whether the onus on the claimant to prove bona fide passenger status was discharged.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Union of India vs. Rina DeviDistinguished¶14
Union of India vs. Rina Devi (2019) 3 SCC 572 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 1 enactments
S.R.Vijayakumar
Smt.V.Santhi
The Union of India owning Southern Railway
S.Vaidyanathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
