Railway Cannot Deny Compensation Without Leading Proper Evidence That Deceased Was Not Bonafide Passenger: Bombay HC

While highlighting that the order passed by the Railway Tribunal is not only perverse but contrary to the aims and objects of the beneficial legislation of compensation to the victims of a railway accident, the Bombay High Court quashed the judgment passed by Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur, and directed the Railway Authorities to pay compensation within three months from the date of passing of this order.

A Single Judge Bench of Justice M.S Jawalkar observed that “Once it is duly established that they were bonafide passengers, it was the Railway who has to rebut evidence by leading proper evidence that the deceased was not a bonafide passenger of the Railway”.

Advocate Sumesha Chaudhari appeared for the Appellants, whereas Advocate N.G. Chaubey appeared for the Respondents.

The brief facts of the case were that the deceased while travelling from Daund to Itarsi along with his brother and other relatives, had purchased a valid journey ticket. On the way to return from Braramati, they boarded Karnataka Express. When the said train was passing from Jalgaon the deceased was going to the washroom and the said train received the unexpected jerk due to which the deceased was pushed by the passenger and fell from the running train. The co-passengers took him to the hospital but the deceased succumbed to the injuries. Therefore, the dependents of the deceased filed a claim application and demanded compensation for such an untoward incident. The Respondent Railway has resisted the claim application by filing a reply along with DRM, Statuary Report with a defense that the deceased was not the bonafide passenger of the train and the death of the deceased has not been caused in an untoward incident. The Railway Tribunal rejected the claim considering that the alleged incident is not covered under section 123(c) or section 124 A of the Railway Act. Hence, the appellants approached the High Court.

After considering the submission, the Bench found that it is mentioned in the Accidental Death (AD) itself that the deceased was travelling along with his relatives from Daund to Bhusawal and fell at Jalgaon.

Finding that there was no reason for the deceased to board down at Jalgaon and therefore, the evidence laid by the claimant appears to be probable, the Bench observed that if inquest panchanama is perused, there is a reference of three tickets recovered from the pocket of shirt of the deceased.

“The opinion in postmortem report clearly says that death due to Polytrauma due to railway accident. There is a verification report in respect of tickets on record as page A-89. As such, all the persons were bonafide passengers of the train Daund to Itarsi and paid Rs.220/- for the second class. All these aspects are deliberately ignored by Railway Tribunal”, added the Bench.

The Bench also highlighted that there is due explanation put forth by the claimants, as to why it was not immediately informed to the Railway Authorities as for them saving life was important at the relevant time.

“It is also duly explained that they tried to hospitalize the deceased in a private hospital, which was shown by the Maroti Car driver, however, the doctor was not available and therefore they were required to shift him to the Government Hospital. General experience in a Government hospital is known unless formalities are not completed, hospital persons do not admit a person. As such, delay in admission is duly explained”, added the Bench.

The High Court observed that the Tribunal has not properly appreciated the timing of admission nor appreciated the fact that Death Certificate and Police Report also shows that the deceased fell from the train and as he fell, both the relatives were required to board the train.

Accordingly, the High Court allowed the appeal and held that the applicants are entitled to an amount of Rs.8,00,000/- plus interest at the rate of Rs.6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till its realization.

Cause Title: Kavita and Ors. v. Union of India

Click here to read/download the Judgment