Manoj Kumar Ohri, J
1. By way of present appeal filed under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (hereinafter, referred to as the Act ), the appellants have assailed judgment dated 21.02.2018 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal in O.A. (IIu) No.195/2017, whereby the claim application filed by them was dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that the Tribunal erred in denying the claim of the appellants only on the ground that there was some delay in the recovery of the journey ticket.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, supported the impugned judgment by submitting that nobody had witnessed the falling of the deceased from any train, as the body was found lying in an injured condition. It was further contended that on the first page of the panchanama, no recovery of the journey ticket was shown.
4. I have heard learned counsels for the parties and also gone through the material placed on record.
5. The facts in brief are that in the claim application, it was claimed that Kelash Sahu @ Nanu (deceased) undertook a train journey on 11.05.2017 from Bilaspur Junction to Hazrat Nizamuddin after purchasing a valid journey ticket bearing No.55925046. On 12.05.2017, when the train reached near Katiya Bridge between Jajau Railway Station and Bhandai Railway Station, the deceased, who was standing near the gate of the train compartment, fell down from the running train due to sudden jerk and heavy push of passengers from the compartment, resulting in grievous injuries and leading to his death.
The Tribunal, while rejecting the claim application, premised its finding on the delay in recovery of the journey ticket as well as uncertainty as to which train, if any, the deceased had boarded.
6. From the material on record, it is apparent that the first information about the incident was given by one Shri Ram Niwas, Muqaddam, at 06:32 hrs. to Dy. Station Superintendent of Jajau Railway Station. It was reported that the person in question was lying in an injured condition between Up and Dn Main lines. At that time, the person was alive and taken to SNMC Hospital, Agra, for treatment.
The panchanama (Ex.A-2) prepared on 13.05.2017 mentioned recovery from the deceased of ticket bearing No.55925046 for journey from Bilaspur Jn. to Hazrat Nizamuddin.
7. Thus, the presumption drawn by the Tribunal that the journey ticket was procured and planted is without any rational basis. Simply because the panchanama was prepared after a delay of few hours, it can in no manner lead to a certain finding that the journey ticket was planted. In view of the panchanama (Ex.A-2), which in fact was prepared by the official(s) of the respondent, the finding of the Tribunal on the issue of bonafide passenger is erroneous and liable to be interfered with.
8. Further, mere fact that the train in which the deceased undertook the journey was not ascertained, the factum of him having been reported to be found injured on the railway tracks between Jajau Railway Station and Bhandai Railway Station cannot be ignored. It is pertinent that in the DSC RPF, Agra Investigation Report, it was stated that the deceased received injuries on account of fall from an unknown moving train between Jajau-Bhandai. In the DRM Report as well, it was opined that the deceased received injuries on account of fall from the train leading to his death.
In this backdrop, the reasoning adopted by the Tribunal that the claimant s assertion of fall having occurred on account of violent jerk was liable to be disbelieved as it was generally adopted by many claimants, as well as reliance on the fact that no passenger pulled the emergency chain, does not find favour with this Court. In case of unaccompanied travel of the injured/deceased, it is difficult for claimants to prove the exact manner in which the accident took place and determination of untoward incident is guided by attending circumstances apparent from the record. Considering the material on record, this Court is of the opinion that the deceased suffered an untoward incident as defined under Section 123(c) of the Railways Act, 1989.
9. Accordingly, the appellants succeed. The appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment dated 21.02.2018 is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the concerned Tribunal for awarding compensation to the appellants in accordance with law. Let the matter be listed at the first instance before the Tribunal on 13.03.2023 and the compensation amount be released to the appellants/claimants within two weeks thereafter.
10. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
11. The Registry shall communicate a copy of this judgment to the concerned Tribunal forthwith for information.
