UNION OF INDIA Vs. ANURADHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is directed against the judgment and award in Claim Application No.93/OAII/RCT/NGP/2005, dated 06/03/2009 decided by Railway Claims Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur whereby claimants were entitled for compensation in the sum of Rs.4,00,000/.

(2.) Facts in nutshell are stated as under On 01/10/2004 Narendra Deshmukh (deceased) was going to Purna, hence, had been to Nanded Railway Station and purchased a general class ticket for Purna at about 4.00 p.m. There was announcement that the train to Purna arrived at Platform No.3, therefore, he boarded in the train by name Sachkhand Express bearing No.2715 under the impression that it was the train going to Purna, but due to sudden jerk resulted from applying brakes to the train, he slipped out of the door way, fell down from the train and died. Due to this untoward incident, the respondentsclaimants, who are legal heirs of the victim, filed the claim application in the Railway Claims Tribunal at Nagpur claiming therein that they were dependents on the deceased and entitled for compensation.

(3.) According to learned Advocate for the appellant, before the Railway Tribunal, Railway Administration had denied the liability on the ground that alleged victim Narendra Deshmukh desired to go to Purna by purchasing general class ticket, but he had boarded in the wrong train which in fact was going to yard after it had reached its last destination and, therefore, deceased cannot be considered as bona fide passenger of the train in which he boarded on 01/10/2004. Learned Advocate for the appellant contended that Tribunal, therefore, wrongly awarded the claim and in fact ought to have observed that the deceased did not abide by rules and regulations by boarding inside the wrong train and died as a result of wrong committed by himself. Hence, Railway is not answerable to the claim. It is therefore, prayed that impugned judgment and award be quashed and set aside. The question thus arise is as to whether the Railway Administration can avoid its liability to pay compensation on this pretext The answer must be emphatic negative for the reasons discussed hereinafter.