Compensation to passengers: HC reverse orders of tribunal

Image
Press Trust of India Madurai
Last Updated : Jun 18 2016 | 11:48 AM IST
The Madras High Court today ruled that the onus was on the railways to prove whether a person, who died after falling from a crowded train, was a bonafide passenger or not and reversed the orders of Railways Claims Tribunal refusing compensation to families of two such victims.
In a judgement reserved in the principal seat of the High Court in Chennai and delivered in the Madurai Bench here, Justice T Raja held that "the onus is on the Railways (and not on the claimants for compensation) to prove that the deceased were not bona fide passengers of trains. Normally it was presumed that a passenger in a train held a valid ticket."
Allowing two different appeals by a common order, the judge reversed the orders passed by Railway Claims Tribunal in September 2008 refusing compensation to families of two passengers who died while travelling in Electric Multiple Unit trains in Chennai in 2002 and 2006.
The judge directed the Southern Railways to pay a compensation of Rs 4 lakh each with interest to the claimants.
The judge held that the tribunal had erred in expecting the claimants to produce valid tickets.
The railways could not deny compensation to the family members on the ground that the passengers were not bonafide travellers and they were not able to produce tickets or any other travel authority to establish that the deceased were bonafide passengers of the train in question.
The tribunal had erred in expecting the claimants to produce valid tickets, the judge said, adding the Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, provided for paying compensation for any "untoward incident," irrespective of the negligence on the part of the railways, subject to conditions that the deceased or injured purchased a valid ticket and it was not an instance of attempt to suicide or intoxication.
One case was filed by parents of T Jagan, who died after hitting an electric post while travelling in an overcrowded train on April 10, 2006.
The second claim was filed by the wife and children of K Ekambaran, a construction worker, who died in a similar incident on May 28, 2002.
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Jun 18 2016 | 11:48 AM IST

Next Story