Case Note & Summary
The appeal was filed by the original applicants, Vasanti Parsottam Patel and Mrs. Urvashi Ravi Jugran, challenging the order dated 29 September 2014 of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Mumbai, which rejected their claim for compensation on the ground that the deceased died due to self-inflicted injury and not an 'untoward incident' under the Railways Act, 1989. The deceased was a bonafide passenger travelling from Navsari to Borivali in an Express train on 4 April 2011. Between Virar and Nalasopara railway stations, he fell down and was pulled out from the wheels of the compartment. A ticket was found on his body, confirming his bonafide passenger status. The guard's report, based on information from a fellow passenger, stated that the deceased was trying to alight from the moving train. The Tribunal relied on this to conclude self-inflicted injury. The High Court noted that neither the passenger nor the guard was examined by the railway before the Tribunal. The court held that in the absence of such evidence, the reasoning based on unexamined statements cannot be accepted. There was no eye witness to the deceased alighting from the moving train. Therefore, the court set aside the Tribunal's order and allowed the appeal, directing the railway to pay compensation as per law.
Headnote
A) Railways Act - Untoward Incident - Section 124A - Burden of Proof - The railway authorities failed to examine the passenger or guard who allegedly stated that the deceased was trying to alight from a moving train. In the absence of such evidence, the Tribunal's finding of self-inflicted injury cannot be sustained. Held that the death was an untoward incident and the claimants are entitled to compensation (Paras 4-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the death of a passenger who fell from a train can be treated as an 'untoward incident' under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, or whether it was a self-inflicted injury.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 29 September 2014 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Mumbai is set aside. The respondent-railways is directed to pay compensation to the appellants in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Burden of proof on railway to establish self-inflicted injury
- Untoward incident includes accidental falls from train
- Non-examination of material witnesses leads to adverse inference
