UNION OF INDIA Vs. ACHHU BABU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Principal Bench of the Railway Claims Tribunal dated March 10, 2008. By virtue of the impugned judgment, the respondent herein has been awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 4 lacs along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of the order on account of his having lost both his legs in an untoward incident which happened when he was travelling as a bona fide passenger holding a valid ticket bearing No. G-26089194 by train No. 4556 from Delhi Shahdara Railway Station to Bareilly.

(2.) According to the case set up by the respondent before the Railway Claims Tribunal, he had boarded the aforesaid train on March 1, 2007 after purchasing the afore-mentioned ticket for an amount of Rs. 73/-. There was a heavy rush of passengers in the train as a result of which he could not move forward and while he was still standing on the doorway, the train started with a jerk. As a consequence, he lost his balance and fell out of the moving train resulting in serious injuries to him which ultimately led to amputation of both his legs. He was rescued by the police officials and was taken to G.T.B. hospital for treatment where both his legs were amputated.

(3.) The DD entry of the incident was recorded by the police and so also the statement of the respondent after he was declared fit to make the statement. The Railway has not disputed that the respondent fell from the moving train. However, it tried to negate his claim for compensation by contending that he was not holding a valid ticket and also on the ground that the accident did not take place on account of negligence of the Railways. The Claims Tribunal has rejected both the contentions of the Railways. It has been held that the respondent produced a valid ticket (Ex.A3) while the Railways produced no evidence in rebuttal. In the absence of any evidence from the side of the Railways, there was no reason for the Tribunal to disbelieve the ticket which was produced by the respondent and consequently no reason to doubt that he was not a bona fide passenger travelling the aforesaid train. As regards the contention that the accident did not take place on account of negligence of the Railways, the Tribunal has held that in view of Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, the Railways is liable to pay compensation to a victim when in the course of working of railway, an untoward incident occurs regardless of whether or not there has been any wrongful act, neglect or default on the part of the railway administration. It is only if the victim dies or suffers injury on account of any criminal act on its part that the railways shall not be liable to pay compensation. It is further held by the Tribunal that no suggestion was given to the respondent that he himself was responsible for the injuries sustained by him.