LAWS(DLH)-2017-5-274

SHYAM NARAYAN AND ORS. Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On May 31, 2017
Shyam Narayan And Ors. Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This first appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 is filed by the appellants who were the applicants before the Railway Claims Tribunal. By this first appeal appellants/applicants impugn the judgment of the Railway Claims Tribunal dated 10.5.2016 dismissing their claim petition. While the Railway Claims Tribunal has held that the deceased Sh. Manoj was a bona fide passenger, and also that the deceased died on account of fall from the train, however, it has been held that the deceased died on account of his own criminal negligence and hence the appellants/applicants were not entitled to compensation.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the deceased Sh. Manoj along with one Smt. Bindu was going from Kharawar to Daya Basti on 1.9.2014 in a Passenger Train no. 6491 It is pleaded that the deceased had boarded the train, when due to heavy rush and jerk in the train, he fell down from the moving train and received fatal injuries. The subject claim petition was therefore filed seeking statutory compensation of Rs. 4 lacs.

(3.) The Railway Claims Tribunal has held in para 10 of the impugned judgment that the deceased died on account of his own criminal negligence because the deceased had tried to board the train when the train had picked up speed and was travelling at about 20 kms per hour, and the train had crossed half of the platform. The deceased had come running from the side of the ASM's office and tried to board the moving train. The deceased however could not board the train and instead collided with the train. This has been specifically deposed by Sh. Satish Kumar who was the guard of the train, and who deposed as RW-1. This statement of the guard Sh. Satish Kumar as RW-1 of the deceased trying to board the moving train which had left half of the platform and having a speed of 20 kms per hour remained unchallenged in the cross-examination. Accordingly, the Railway Claims Tribunal in terms of this finding dismissed the claim petition.