Maniben Mohanlal Vora and 1 vs Union of India

Honourable Mr. Justice K.S. Jhaveri

By way of this Appeal the Appellant has challenged the judgment and award dated 18.8.1999 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Ahmedabad, in Claim Application No. 29 of 1998, whereby the Tribual has dismissed the claim application filed by the parents of the deceased-present appellants.

The short facts of this case are that on 29.09.1998 one Mahendra kumar M. Vora, was travelling from Rajkot to Sabarmati in Saurashtra Mail, with second class free pass, bearing no. 300549, issued by the railway authority. When the train reached at Sabarmati station, Mahendrakumar M. Vora, tried to alight from the train, but he slipped from the compartment gate and fell down from the compartment and crushed down under the wheels of train and died. Therefore his legal heirs filed Claim application No. 29 of 1998. The Tribunal after hearing learned advocates for both the parties and after recording the evidence dismissed the claim Application. Hence, this appeal.

Heard the learned Advocates for both the parties.

Learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has committed error in holding that deceased was not having a valid pass for the train in which he was travelling. He further submitted that the deceased slipped from the compartment while getting down from the train and sustained fatal injuries. Hence, the incident is untoward incident and squarely covered u/s 123(c)(2) of the Railways Act, 1989.

Learned Advocate for the respondent submitted that the order of the Tribunal is just and proper and no interference is called for.

This court has considered the documents produced on record as also the arguments advanced by the learned Advocate for both the parties. From the record it is clear that the deceased was travelling unauthorizedly and the train in which the deceased was travelling had no stoppage at Sabarmati Junction. His pass was not valid upto Ahmedabad. Therefore, he tried to get down at Sabarmati Junction and in that process he sustained grievous injuries and lost his life. Even in the crossexamination one witness namely Anilkumar T. Parmar has admitted that they have knowledge that the train in which they were travelling had no stoppage in Sabarmati Junction.

A contention has been raised by learned Advocate for the appellant that it is an untoward incident. However it is not an untoward incident as the deceased has voluntarily come out of a train where there is no stop in Sabarmati Junction.

In the premises aforesaid, I do not find any merits in this appeal. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.