R GEETHA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) n 7.7.1991, the husband of the appellant Lance Naik Raju, who was escorting the military consignment in a railway wagon, fell down while taking meals. As a result of the incident, he sustained serious injuries and succumbed to the injuries. Occurrence of the accident, death due to the injuries sustained in the incident, etc. were not disputed. However, her claim for compensation was rejected by the Railway Claims Tribunal only on the ground that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger in the passenger train. Hence this appeal.

(2.) S.124-A of the Railways Act, 1989 deals with compensation on account of untoward incident. S.124-A is quoted as follows:

(3.) The definition given to the "passenger" is an inclusive definition. It will even include a person with a valid platform ticket. Merely because it also includes a person who has purchased a valid ticket for travelling in a train carrying passengers, it cannot be stated that the deceased was not a passenger. The word "include" is used to enlarge the meaning of the word comprehending not only such things as they signify according to their natural import, but also those things which the definition clause declares that they shall include as held in Dilworth v. Commissioner of Stamps, 1899 AC 99 . In that decision Lord Watson observed as follows: