UNION OF INDIA Vs. PARAMESWARANPILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The railway administration appeals against the judgment of the Railway Claims Tribunal granting compensation to the parents of Radhakrishna Pillai (for short, 'Pillai'), who had died as a result of an incident on 11.11.2004. The Tribunal found that while travelling from Calicut to Kannur in train No. 619, he fell when that running train jerked violently, resulting in the door of the compartment swinging and smashing him down and that it was an 'untoward incident' as defined in the Railways Act, 1989 (for short, 'the Act'), for which compensation is payable under section 124-A of the Act. The Tribunal repelled Railways' plea that he was not a bona fide passenger. The ground of the Railways in this appeal is confined to the plea that Pillai cannot be held to be a bona fide passenger as his passenger ticket was not produced by the claimants, or recovered from his body.

(2.) Pillai was injured on 11.11.2004. He was removed to hospital where he died on 17.11.2004. His mother deposed as PW 1 that her son had purchased a ticket from Calicut Railway Station. That was not recovered from his body. There is nothing on record to show that the mother was accompanying her son. Obviously, PW 1's statement that her son had purchased ticket from Calicut Railway Station is a presumptive one, going by the common course of human conduct. Deceased Pillai was having some business. His mother's testimony was that he was travelling in connection with his business. In the common course of human conduct, his mother would never have had any reason to presume or believe that he would have travelled without a valid ticket. Going by the facts, we do not see any premise to presume that he would have travelled without a valid ticket. As rightly noted by the Tribunal, the Railways have security personnel who would and could arrest unauthorised travellers. There are also Ticket Examiners. In the common course of human conduct, we cannot but presume that Pillai was a passenger travelling under a valid ticket. There is nothing on record to the contrary. Following the incident, Pillai remained hospitalised from 11.11.2004 till he died on 17.11.2004. These and the attendant circumstances persuade us to hold that it would be wholly unreasonable, in the realm of appreciation of evidence, to find that deceased was travelling without a valid journey ticket.

(3.) The Tribunal is authorised to decide on claims of compensation under section 124-A of the Railways Act. That is a piece of social welfare legislation intended to provide benefit by way of succour to the victims of and dependants of passengers who happened to be killed as a result of an 'untoward incident'. That provision is made 'notwithstanding anything contained in any other law'.