ANNAPOORANI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The three issues, that are raised in this appeal, by the Railways are that (i) the claimant did not prove that the deceased was a bona fide passenger in the train and therefore, the railway administration is not liable to pay compensation; (ii) the first claimant's husband/deceased met with an accident only on account of his own negligence and not on account of any negligence on the part of the Railways; and (iii) when the Statute do not provide for payment of interest, the claimants are not entitled to ask for interest. It is the contention of railways that the deceased was not a bona fide passenger in the train and that even assuming that he was a passenger, he fell down on account of his own negligence and therefore, the railway administration is not liable to pay the compensation.

(2.) The contention of the learned counsel for the Railways is that the claimant has not proved that he was a bona fide passenger, as the ticket itself has not been produced and therefore, the basic requirement, regarding his status as bona fide passenger, is not proved. Therefore, the Railway is not responsible to satisfy the claim.

(3.) The next important issue to be considered is whether on proof of negligence on the part of the deceased, the claimants would be dis-entitled to make a claim under Railway Claims Tribunal Act. In other words, the issue to be considered is, whether the Railways are absolved from the liability to pay the compensation under Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989 for the accidental death of a bonafide passenger by attributing negligence upon him.