AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S.N. Satyanarayana, J.—Claimant in O.A. No. 49/2007 on the file of Railway Claims Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, has come up in this
appeal challenging the judgment dated 23.09.2008 passed therein.
Brief facts leading to this appeal are as under:
Appellant herein, claimant before the Tribunal stated that on 21.01.2007 she came to Bangalore City Railway Station to catch Train No. 213,
Tirupathi Express. At that time while she was trying to cross the track to reach other side to get the said Train bearing No. 271 Salem Express
which was coming in reverse direction without any signal or caution on platform No. 5 dashed against her causing amputation of her both legs.
Hence the Claim Petition was filed by her seeking compensation in a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- for the amputation of both her legs.
In the proceedings before the Tribunal, on recording the evidence and after hearing the counsel appearing for claimant and as well as
Respondent - railways, the Tribunal proceeded to answer the issues framed therein against the claimant and consequently rejected her claim. Being
aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed.
Heard the counsel for Appellant as well as Respondent - railways. On going through the grounds of appeal and as well as the findings of
Tribunal, it is clearly seen that Appellant entered Bangalore City Railway Station on 21.01.2007 to catch Train No. 213, Tirupathi Express to
reach Tirupathi. It is not in dispute that though sufficient facilities are provided by the Railways for the passengers to move from one platform to
another platform either by using over-bridge or underground sub-way in a safe and careful manner without exposing themselves to the risk of their
life and limb. Appellant in gross violation of all safety measures provided by Railways has tried to cross the platform. While doing so and in the
process of crossing platform No. 5, she has crossed the same over the track without observing on coming train, i.e., Train No. 271 Salem
Express, which was being shunted at the relevant time attaching the same to the engine of the said train.
The incident which has taken place in the process of shunting of the train to its engine cannot be considered as an untoward incident as
contemplated u/s 123(c)(2) of the Railway Act and as such the claimant would not be entitled to receive any compensation for the negligent act on
her part, which has resulted in amputation of her both legs. On the contrary, the conduct of the Appellant in causing the accident would come
under Explanation to Section 124-A, more particularly Clause (b), which deals with self inflicted .injury. In the instant case accident which has
resulted in causing self-inflicted injury to Appellant will have to blame herself.
Since the incident does not fall u/s 123(c)(2) of the Act, the Tribunal has rightly rejected the Claim Petition filed by Appellant, which cannot be
found fault with in this appeal. Accordingly the appeal filed by the Claimant in O.A. No. 49/2007 does not merit admission and accordingly the
same is dismissed, without any order as to costs.