THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO.746 OF 2009 JUDGMENT: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal by the Railways, under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, is preferred aggrieved by the order, dated 17-03-2009 in O.A.A No.559 of 2006 on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench at Secunderabad, whereunder and whereby the application filed by the applicant claiming compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for the injury sustained by him, was allowed granting compensation of Rs.1,60,000/- and directing the Railways to deposit the said amount before the Tribunal within 60 days from the date of order, failing which, they are liable to pay interest at 9% p.a. from the date of order till the date of payment. 2. Brief facts are that on 08-11-2006 the applicant boarded Tirupathi-Katpadi passenger train to go his village after purchasing journey ticket. When the train reached Pakala Railway Station, the applicant got down from the train for drinking water. Thereafter, while he was trying to board the train, the train started with a sudden jerk, as a result of which, he accidentally slipped and fell down and two wheels of the train ran over on his left leg, which was crushed. He was taken to hospital, where his left leg was amputated below knee. 3. The railways filed written statement denying the averments in the application and stated that there was no incident of fall of any passenger from the train, that the alleged incident if any, was caused by the criminal acts of the applicant and the applicant is not entitled for compensation for such self inflicted injuries. 4. Basing on the above pleadings, the following issues have been framed for trial. 1.Whether the applicant, was a bona fide passenger of train in question? 2.Whether the applicant sustained injuries as a result of untoward incident as alleged? 3.Whether the applicant is entitled to claim compensation as prayed for? 4.To what relief? 5. During enquiry, the applicant himself was examined as A.W.1 and got marked Ex.A1 to A8. On behalf of Railways R.Ws. 1 and 2 were examined and Exs.R1 to R3 were marked. 6. The Claims Tribunal, after considering the evidence on record, allowed the application as stated above. Challenging the same, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the Railways. 7. Now the point for consideration is whether the order of the Claims Tribunal is correct, legal and proper? 8. For the purpose of claiming compensation under Section 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989 (for short ‘the Act’), two requirements have to be satisfied, firstly, there must be untoward incident whereunder a person died. Untoward incident includes a person falling from the running train accidentally. Secondly, a person who died or sustained injuries must be a bona fide passenger travelling in the train with a valid ticket. As far as bona fide passenger is concerned, the Railway Administration is not disputing about the same. 9. Learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant- Railways contended that the applicant was trying to board the running train and due to his negligence, the incident had happened and therefore, the applicant is not entitled for compensation. 10. There cannot be any dispute that if a person accidentally falls from a running train, then he is entitled for compensation. In this case, no doubt the injured tried to board the moving train, as a result, he slipped accidentally and fell down from the compartment and received injury to his left leg, which was subsequently amputated. It is the case of the Railway Administration that the applicant due to his own negligence while trying to board the moving train, the incident had happened. Even assuming for a moment that there was negligence on the part of the applicant in boarding the train, that defence is not available to the Railway Administration. The defences available to the Railway Administration are enumerated in the proviso to Section 124-A of the Act. The case of the Railway Administration does not fall under any one of the clauses as mentioned in the proviso to Section 124-A of the Act. Therefore, the Tribunal rightly awarded compensation considering the fact that the injured while boarding the train, accidentally fall from the train and sustained injury. The said order needs no interference by this Court. 11. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________ K.C. BHANU, J DATED: 18-08-2011 Hsd