Neha & Ors. v. Union of India

1. By way of present appeal filed under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, the appellants, who were claimants before the Railway Claim Tribunal, challenged the judgment dated 07.09.2020 whereby their claim application filed was dismissed.

2. Appellants claimed themselves to be wife and minor children of deceased late Sh. Vivek Sharma who statedly died in an untoward incident on 29th /30th January, 2019. It was claimed that on the said date, late Sh. Vivek Sharma undertook a train journey from New Ghaziabad Railway Station to Muradnagar Railway Station by a passenger train after purchasing a valid journey ticket. However, in the accident, his bag alongwith his purse and the journey ticket were lost which could not be recovered. While dismissing the claim application, the Tribunal arrived at the conclusion that in absence of recovery of any journey ticket, the deceased could not be held to be a bonafide passenger and a victim of an untoward incident especially because his body was discovered after a considerable gap.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants while assailing the aforementioned observations in the impugned order contended that the Tribunal failed to appreciate the testimony of Smt. Vineeta who had deposed that she was witness to the deceased purchasing the train journey ticket as well as to him boarding the train.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent defended the impugned judgment.

5. Admittedly, the train journey ticket was not recovered. The first information about the incident was given by Keyman, Pankaj Kumar at 5:00 am on 30.01.2019 to the Station Master, Guldhar who, in turn, informed the civil police as well as RPF, Modinagar immediately. When the civil police reached the site of the incident, a Jamatalashi was carried out, in which a slip of paper containing telephone number was found and when the police called that number, it turned out to be of Pramod Sharma, uncle of the deceased. Resultantly, Pramod Sharma, uncle of the deceased was informed about the said incident. In the claim petition, it was averred that the deceased had boarded the train however, because of overcrowding on account of farmers’ agitation, the deceased could not find a berth and had to stand near the door of the compartment. In the midst of the journey, on account of sudden jerk, the deceased fell from the moving train. It was further averred that one Vineeta W/o Ramgopal had seen the deceased purchasing the journey ticket and boarding the train. During the proceedings before the Tribunal, Vineeta appeared as AW-2 and supported the averments made in the claim petition. It was deposed that she was a resident of Village Duhai, District Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh and was working in Ghaziabad. She was holder of a Monthly Season Ticket (MST). She further deposed that deceased was her nephew and on the date of incident she had met the deceased at the railway station. As the deceased ordinarily used to travel by his motorcycle, on finding him at the railway station she had asked him the reason of travelling by train. The deceased had replied that as his motorcycle was out of order, he was going by train. She also stated that in her presence, the deceased had purchased the journey ticket and also boarded the train along with her however, they had boarded different coaches as the train was overcrowded on account of farmers’ agitation.

6. In the claim proceedings, burden is cast upon the claimant to prove relevant facts with respect to purchase of a journey ticket and performing the train journey. In the present case, the appellants had been able to do both by stating the same on affidavit, and which was also supported by the testimony of an independent witness AW-2/Vineeta. There is no dispute that body of the deceased was found on the same railway track on which the subject train journey was undertaken. As per the Train Signal Register that was filed with the DRM Report before the Tribunal, the journey was undertaken through Meerut Shuttle bearing no. 54411 which left Ghaziabad Railway Station at 19:42 hrs. on 21.01.2019. The body was discovered at about 5 am. Merely because the body was not discovered in the night by any person could not have been the reason for dismissing the claim petition especially in view of the fact that January a winter month and there is a distinct possibility that no one would have noticed the body on the railway tracks in the night.

7. In the aforesaid factual matrix of the case, this Court is of the considered view that deceased was a bonafide passenger and the accident that occurred was an ‘untoward incident’. Accordingly, appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Tribunal for awarding the compensation as per the Railway Claims Tribunal Act within two weeks, for which purpose the matter be listed before the Tribunal on 31.05.2023.

JUDGE MAY 16, 2023