1
Court No. - 27
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 261 of 2003
Petitioner :- Union Of India Thr.G.M. N.R.New Delhi
Respondent :- Laxmi Singh @ Laxmi Thakur
Petitioner Counsel :- Mohd. Abid Ali
Respondent Counsel :- Rajendra Jaiswal,Rajendra Jaiswal
Hon'ble Devi Prasad Singh,J.
Hon’ble Dr. Satish Chandra,J.
Heard Sri Mohd. Abid Ali, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Rajendra
Jaiswal, learned counsel for the private respondent.
The case in brief is that deceased Bhola had boarded the train namely
Vaishali Express at Gorakhpur railway station for his journey to New Delhi on 10th
September, 1999. When the train was at a place between Ferozabad and
Madaankorar Railway Stations, it appears that the deceased fell down from the train
and died on account of injuries sustained by him. The statement of Laxmi Singh, the
father of the deceased and eye-witness Subhash Chand was recorded which show
that on 11th September, 1999 the deceased Bhola accidentally fell down from the
train and subsequently succumbed to his injuries. It has been stated by the appellant
that the deceased fell down from the train while exchanging the compartment in
running train. It was also pleaded by the appellant that accident does not attract the
ingredients as provided under Section 124A of the Act.
On behalf of the claimant, two witnesses appeared namely Laxmi, the father
of the deceased Bhola and another eye-witness Subhash Chand who supported the
accident.
The Tribunal on the basis of the parties’ statement arrived at the conclusion
that the claimant is entitled for compensation. Sri Abid Ali, learned counsel for the
appellant submits that the accident is not covered under Section 123 of the Act. The
deceased fell down from the train because of his own fault. However, from the
materials on record, it appears that the deceased has boarded the train at
Gorakhpur railway station to reach his destination. Nothing has been brought on
record to indicate that the deceased fell down from the train for his own fault. It is
settled by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Akhtari v. Union of India,
2009 ( 27) LCD, 240 that if a person boards on the train and fells down from the train
because of certain jerks, then in such a situation he or she shall be entitled for
compensation and the Railway shall pay the same. The aforesaid decision of this
Court has also been affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The deceased was
bona fide passenger and was travelling in the train namely Vaishali Express who fell
2
down and in consequence thereof he suffered grievous injury and also died, hence
he is liable to get compensation.
It has been vehemently argued by Sri Abid Ali, Senior Advocate, that no
compensation should be awarded since the deceased should not have gone towards
gate in the running train. Submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that it
does not make out any case for payment of compensation. A person while travelling
in the train keeping in view the overcrowded compartment may be compelled to
stand near the gate. The burden lies on the Railway to establish that the deceased
was neither a bona fide passenger nor he or she is entitled for compensation
because of his own fault. The relevant portion of Smt. Akhtari (supra) is reproduced
as under:-
“While assailing the impugned award, learned counsel for the
appellant has vehemently argued that it was because of heavy
crowd in the compartment, the deceased was compelled to
stand adjacent to the door and since he dragged about 100
meters, the clothes of the deceased were torn hence the ticket
purchased by the deceased might have lost. It was further
submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant Sri Manish
Kumar Srivastava that the deceased was having ticket and
since he dragged about 100 meters or more, it was natural
that when the body was found, the ticket might not have been
found in the possession of the deceased. Learned counsel for
the appellant has further given much emphasis on the fact that
because of dragging, the deceased was having only
underwear on his body apart from torn shirt. It is proved from
the medical report that bruises and scratches were found on
his body with dragged marks.”
Before parting with the judgment, we reiterate again that the Railway itself do
something to close the doors whenever the train leaves the platform and to open the
doors on the next stoppage by adopting manual or mechanical recourse. It is the
duty of the Railway to ensure safety and security of the human life as preventive
measure. Otherwise any loss to human life will increase burden on the Railway to
pay compensation. In majority of cases, we have noticed that the passengers fell
down from train because of open doors and due to crowd in the compartment. They
are compelled to stand near the gate and on account of jerks in the train, the
passengers fell down from the open door. Such situation should be checked.
In view of the above, we find that the appeal lacks merit and it is accordingly
dismissed.
Learned counsel for the appellant shall communicate the observations made
by this Court to the Chairman, Railway Board forthwith.
The amount deposited in this Court shall be remitted to the Tribunal and the
Tribunal shall disburse the same to the claimant as per the award.
Order Date :- 6.7.2010
VB/-
3