Mangal Bhanudas Thombare v. Union of India

1. This appeal is filed by the original applicant to challenge order dated dated 28 February 2018 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Mumbai (Tribunal).

2. The Tribunal dismissed the application on the ground that the deceased died because of his own negligence while saving life of his brother’s wife, who was falling down from train when all of them were about to board Sahyadri Express from “Pimpri” Railway Station to reach their destination “Bhilavdi” Railway Station. According to the Tribunal, this does not amount to an “untoward incident”.

3. Mr. Rao, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the deceased along with his family members and relatives purchased tickets 1 of 4 2026:BHC-AS:9346 at Pimpri Railway Station for travel to Bhilavdi by Sahyadri Express. While the train arrived at Pimpri Railway Station all of them started boarding the train, but the train started immediately and the brother's wife of the deceased was falling down. The deceased, to save the brother’s wife and to board the train met with the accident and both fell from the platform and came under the wheels of the train and sustained injuries. Subsequently, the deceased died. Mr. Rao submitted relying on the decision in the case of Damodar Purshottam Thakkar & Anr Vs. The Union of India[1] that the act of boarding and de-boarding would also fall within the ambit of “untoward incident”. He further relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs..

4. Per contra, Ms. Patil, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposed the submission made by the appellant and stated that the deceased died not, when he was traveling in the train, but when he was about to board the train and further when he tried to save his brother’s wife. She submitted that this would amount to self-inflicted injury and would not come under the ambit of an “untoward incident”. She submitted that had he not tried to save his brother’s wife, he would have been saved. She, therefore, submitted that the appeal is devoid of merits and should be dismissed.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent.

6. The accident happened on 13 September 2010 at Pimpri Railway Station when the deceased along with his family members was trying to board Sahyadri Express to reach Bhilavdi. Some of the passengers boarded the train. When the deceased was about to board 1 FA No.1694 of 2016 dated 24 June 2025

2 of 4 the train, he found that his brother’s wife who was in the process of boarding the train was falling down. Therefore, the deceased tried to save his brother’s wife by pushing her inside the compartment and he also made an attempt to board the train. It was at this point of time that the deceased and his brother’s wife fell between the gap of the platform and the train and came under the wheels and the deceased died in the incident.

7. There is no dispute that the ticket was recovered from the deceased and, therefore, the test of “bona fide passenger” has been satisfied, and there is no challenge to the same by the respondent.

8. In my view, the issue of an “untoward incident” while boarding or de-boarding the train is now no longer res-integra. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rina Devi (supra) has held that an accident while boarding or de-boarding the train would amount to “untoward incident” and not self-inflicted injury. This Court in the case of Damodar Purshottam Thakkar & Anr (supra) has also taken the same view.

9. In the instant case, all the five passengers were about to board the train. When the brother’s wife boarded the train, the train started and she lost her balance. Immediately, thereafter the deceased was about to board the train, so he made an attempt to save the brother’s wife and also to board the train. It is in this process that both the brother’s wife and the deceased fell down in the gap between the platform and the train and lost their lives. In my view, this accident will surely fall within Section 123(c)(2) of the Railways Act, 1989 which defines “untoward incident”. The present case is a case of accidental falling of any passenger from a train carrying passengers. Sahyadri Express was a train which was carrying passengers. The deceased was 3 of 4 also a passenger of the same train and he accidentally fell from a train which was carrying passengers. When the phrase “train carrying passengers” is considered in the context of the present case, the incident of falling down while boarding the train will constitute an “untoward incident”.

10. In view of above, the impugned order to the extent it rejects the claim of the applicant on the ground that same does not constitute an “untoward incident” is quashed and set aside.

11. The applicant is directed to make an application to the respondent for the compensation of Rs.[4] lakhs alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of accident till the date of payment subject to cap of Rs.[8] lakhs. The respondent to remit the compensation amount to the applicant’s bank account. The amount should be remitted to the bank account of the applicant within eight weeks from the applicant making an application to the respondent alongwith the present order.

12. The Appeal is disposed of in above terms. [ JITENDRA JAIN, J. ] 4 of 4 Designation: PA To Honourable Judge