Teras Ram Vs Union of India

[2] The issue that needs to b e decided is: “ whether the in j ury suffered b y the claimant-appellant falls w ithin the ambit of injury descri b ed at Serial Item No.19 as held by the Rai l way Claims Tribunal or shall f all within th e ambit of that mentioned at Se r ial No.3 of the Schedule appen d ed to the R a ilway Accidents and Untowar d Incidents (Compensation) R u les, 1990 ?”

¶12

[3] Learned counsel for the a p pellant submits that the Trib u nal complete l y misconstrued the injury suff e red by the appellant and wro n gly held that the injury suffered by the clai m ant would be covered by injur y at Serial N o .19 ignoring injury mentione d at Serial No.3 of the Sche d ule appende d to 1990 Rules.

¶13

[4] Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Railways w o uld RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.01.30 16:07 submit th a t it being a case wherein the cl a imant has suffered amputation o f I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶14

FAO-6951-2017 (O&M) -2-

¶15

one leg and fracture in the other. Learned Tribunal has rightly held the injury suffered by the claimant to be covered by injury No.19.

¶16

[5] I have heard counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through records of the case.

¶17

[6] The injuries suffered by the claimant as described in the Award passed by the learned Tribunal read as under:-

¶18

“ In this case, the applicant suffered traumatic amputation of right leg from thigh and the said injury falls under scheduled injury at Sr. No.19 of part III of the Schedule Rule 3 for which an amount of ₹ 4,80,000/- has been prescribed. The applicant has also suffered other injuries like multiple fractures on left leg and amputation of left heel.”

¶19

[7] Item No.3 and Item No.19 of the Schedule appended to the

¶20

1990 Rules read as under:-

¶21

[8] From the injury suffered by the claimant as spelled out by the

¶22

Tribunal in the impugned award, it is evident that he not only suffered amputation of right leg from thigh but also suffered amputation of heel of

¶23

the left foot. Apart from having lost the heel, the claimant also suffered RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.01.30 16:07 multiple fractures on left leg. This is equivalent loss of foot. I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶24

FAO-6951-2017 (O&M) -3-

¶25

[9] In view thereof, this Court finds that the learned Tribunal erred in assessing the injuries suffered by the claimant. The injury suffered by the claimant in untoward incident is relatable to the injury mentioned at Serial No.3 of the Schedule rather than the one scheduled at Serial No.19.

¶26

[10] In view of the aforesaid discussion, the Award passed by the learned Tribunal is modified to the extent that the injuries suffered by the claimant are held relatable and thus the one that fall within the ambit of injury as enumerated under Item No.3 of the Schedule appended to 1990 Rules. He is held entitled for compensation of ₹ 8,00,000/- instead of ₹ 5,30,000/- as awarded by the learned Tribunal.

¶27

[11] The claimant shall also be entitled for interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of actual realization.

¶28

[12] Needless to say, the amount already paid shall be set off. The amount awarded by this Court shall be released to the claimant forthwith on him furnishing bank details by filing an appropriate application before the learned Tribunal.

¶29

[13] The appeal is d isposed off accordingly.

¶30

[14] All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed off .

¶31

(PANKAJ JAIN)

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

28.01.2026 ‘R. Sharma'

¶34

Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No