SMT. SUNITA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this first appeal, the appellants viz. the widow of the deceased Shri Manohar Gajbhiye, his son and the deceased's mother have challenged the decision dtd. 06/02/2019 of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur rejecting their claim made under the Railways Act, 1989 (the "Railways Act").

(2.) The deceased travelled from Gondia to Rewral in the general coach of a passenger train on valid journey ticket, and deboarded at Rewral. After alighting, as there was no foot overbridge, the deceased was walking along the track with head loads and got hit by Train No.18421 passing through Rewral in the UP direction. The evidence as analyzed and discussed by the Tribunal clearly establishes and concludes that the deceased died due to the hit from the fast moving Train No.18421 on the UP-line while walking beside the railway track at Rewral Station after travelling by the passenger train on a valid journey ticket. These facts are more or less well established and there is no error apparent or perversity in these findings of fact.

(3.) However, the Tribunal has observed that the deceased was carelessly walking on the track and died due to his own negligent act. The Tribunal also concludes that though the deceased was a bonafide passenger till he deboarded at Rewral Railway Station, while walking on the track when he got hit by a train, he was not a bonafide passenger at the time of said incident. The Tribunal also holds that this was not a case of an untoward incident as defined in Sec. 123(c)(2) of the Railways Act, therefore, question of compensation under Sec. 124-A of the Railways Act would not be arise.