New Delhi, The Supreme Court has said the absence of recovery of a train ticket from a deceased passenger cannot result in defeating the compensation claim, as it restored the payout awarded to the parents of a man who died after falling from a moving train in Gujarat in 2017.
A bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and AS Chandurkar set aside the order of the Gujarat High Court rejecting the compensation awarded to the parents of Maheshbhai, who died falling off the general compartment following a sudden jerk and jolt while travelling to Surat via Ahmedabad on September 27, 2017. On June 17, 2022, the Railways Claim Tribunal held that Maheshbhai was the victim of an ‘untoward incident’ and suffered an accidental fall, and his parents, who are the claimants, were held entitled to compensation of ₹ 8 lakh along with interest at the rate of nine per cent per annum from the date of the incident till the date of the order. The bench said the incident occurred on September 27, 2017, which left the victim with grievous injuries and was thereafter hospitalised for a period of over a month.
On the preponderance of probabilities, it can be concluded that the victim was a bona fide passenger and that absence of recovery of his ticket cannot result in defeating the claim for compensation. “He, however, succumbed to his injuries on October 31, 2017.
In normal course, when the victim was undergoing medical treatment, it is quite unlikely that the railway ticket would have been preserved by the claimants,” it said. The bench said the railways failed to discharge the burden that shifted on them in view of the claimant’s statement on oath and taking an overall view of the matter, the tribunal proceeded to hold that the victim was a bona fide passenger and that absence of the ticket could not be held against the claimants. The bench on Friday said, “The high court gave undue importance to the absence of the railway ticket without taking into consideration the statement made on oath by the victim’s father and the fact that the victim had been hospitalised for a period of more than one month.
The bench said the court is inclined to ignore the said investigation report and it cannot come in the way of the claimants in receiving compensation.
