IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2009 / 21ST ASWINA 1931 MFA.No. 197 of 2005 --------------------- (TA.67/2000 of RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM) APPELLANTS/APPLICANTS: ----------------------------- 1. SMT.VALSALA R.PILLAI, W/O.LATE S.P.RAMACHANDRAN PILLAI ALIAS S.P.R.PILLAI, RESIDING AT SIVAS, KANDIYOOR, THATTARAMBALAM P.O., MAVELIKKARA, ALLEPPEY DISTRICT, PIN-690 103. 2. KUM. DEEPA R.PILLAI, D/O.LATE S.P.R.PILLAI, RESIDING AT SIVAS, KANDIYOOR, THATTARAMBALAM P.O., MAVELIKKARA, ALLEPPEY DISTRICT, PIN-690 103. 3. KUM.PRIYA R.PILLAI, D/O.LATE S.P.R.PILLAI, RESIDING AT SIVAS, KANDIYOOR, THATTARAMBALAM P.O., MAVELIKKARA, ALLEPPEY DISTRICT, PIN-690 103. 4. RAJESH KUMAR, S/O.LATE S.P.R.PILLAI, MAJOR, RESIDING AT SIVAS, KANDIYOOR, THATTARAMBALAM P.O., MAVELIKKARA, ALLEPPEY DISTRICT, PIN-690 103. (AT THE TIME OF FILING T.A.NO., 67/00 HE WAS A MINOR). BY ADV. SRI.VADAKARA V.V.N.MENON SRI.T.N.SUKUMARAN RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------ UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, CHENNAI-3. ADV. SRI.N.B.SUNIL NATH,SC, RAILWAYS FOR R1 SRI.SUNIL NATH, SC, RAILWAYS THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JJ. ................................................................................. M.F.A. No. 197 OF 2005 ......................................................................... Dated this the 13th October , 2009 J U D G M E N T P.R. Raman, J: The appellants are legal heirs (wife and children) of the deceased passenger(S.P.R. Pillai) who died in a train accident. They preferred an application before the Railway Claims Tribunal under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 for compensation. It was their case that Ramachandran Pillai, aged 50 years, who was employed as Security in-charge, Ministry of Defence, Canteen Stores Depot at Dimapur, while coming to his native place at Mavelikkara in Kerala on leave, by Coromandel Express train No.2841 of 03.10.1997 from Howrah to Madras, fell down accidentally on 06.10.1997 due to heavy jerk when the train was entering the Ponneri Railway Yard and succumbed. It was also alleged that the deceased lost cash M.F.A. No. 197 OF 2005 2 and luggage worth more than Rs.15,000/-. An amount of Rs. 4 lakhs was claimed as compensation. 2. It is contended by the respondents in their reply that the death was not due to fall from the running train since the body of the deceased was found lying at Km.33/21 on Up line in Ponneri Yard; that there was no chain pulling by the co- passengers nor the incident was reported to any Railway authorities. Therefore, they disputed that the deceased had not travelled and fallen down from the train. They denied their liability to compensate the deceased. 3. Several issues were framed by the Tribunal. All the issues, except the issue as to whether the cause of action alleged to have taken place on 06.10.1997 at Ponneri Yard is correct or not, were virtually decided in favour of the applicants, as contended, but based on the adverse finding regarding the alleged incident, it was held that the applicants are not entitled to get compensation. 4. The evidence consist of sworn in testimony of P.W.1 Exts. P1 to P12 and on the side of the respondents R.Ws. 1 and M.F.A. No. 197 OF 2005 3 2, Exts. R1 to R4(a). Ext.P1 is the journey ticket issued to the deceased S.P. Ramachandran Pillai. Ext.P2 is the reservation slip, Ext.P3 is the identity card. These evidence would show that the deceased had in fact reserved a ticket from Gauhati to Trivandrum Central and travelled from Howrah in the Coromandel Express on 03.10. 1997. This is supported by the sworn in testimony of of R.W.1/Chief Commercial Inspector, who prepared Ext.R1 report, that on the basis of Ext. P1 ticket, the deceased would have boarded the Coromandel Express on 03.10.1997 from Howrah. P.W.1 in her sworn in testimony had deposed that her husband had informed her over phone that he would be coming home by 1st of October, 1997. Subsequently, she got a telegram from the Railway Police informing her that her husband died in a train accident ad she was directed to rush to the police station. The F.I.R. shows that the deceased fell down from the train No.2841 on 06.10.1997 prior to 9.30 hours at KM. 33/21 on Up line at Ponneri Railway Yard and died. Ext.P5 is the letter dated 08.10.1997 sent by the Sub Inspector, Law & Order, Korkkupet Railway Police Station to the Manager, M.F.A. No. 197 OF 2005 4 CSD Depot, Dimapur, Nagaland , stating that “SP.R. Pillai fell down from running train at Ponneri Yard, died and body handed over to relatives after post mortem. Ext.P6 would show that permission was granted to transport the dead body of the deceased. Ext.P7, FIR dated 06.10.1997 would also show that on 06.10.1997, on getting a message from SM/ Ponneri stating that one male body is lying at KM 33/21 on Up line a Ponneri Yard, a case was registered and the original FIR along with the message were submitted to the Tahsildar, Ponneri and other copies of the FIR were sent to the Police Officers concerned. Ext. P8 is the Post Mortem certificate issued by Dr. S. Santhosh Kumar, Assistant Professor of Forensic Medicine, Madras Medical College, Madras, wherein he has opined that the deceased “died of multiple injuries”. Ext.P9 is the death report issued by the Sub Inspector, Law & Order, Korukkupet Railway Station recording the cause of death of the deceased as 'fell down from running train'. Ext. P10, Certificate of Death issued by the Executive Officer, Ponneri Town Panchayat, would also show that the deceased died on 06.10.1997 at Ponneri Railway Station. M.F.A. No. 197 OF 2005 5 5. Heard the learned Counsel for both the sides and also Mr. Sunil Nath the learned Standing Counsel for the Railways. 6. On a careful consideration of the entire evidence, both oral and documentary, the Tribunal entered into a finding that the deceased died by succumbing to the injuries sustained due to fall from train. The Tribunal held that there were some discrepancies regarding the date of travelling with that of the date on which the deceased is reported to have died. Though the deceased had purchased a journey ticket on 03.10.1997 from Howrah by the Coromandel Express, the dead body was found in the morning at 9.30 hrs at Ponneri Yard on 06.10.1997. An attempt was made by the Railways to show that had the deceased actually travelled on 03.10.1997, the death would not happen on 06.10.1997. In support of the said contention, the Railway timetable was referred to and submitted that 27 hours are required for the Coromandel Express to reach Madras from Howrah and Ponneri is 35 Kms away from Chennai Railway Station; that a person starting from Howrah on 03.10.1997 could have reached Madras on 04.10.1997 evening; M.F.A. No. 197 OF 2005 6 since the body of the deceased was found lying on a line not meant for passage of long distance trains such as Coromandel Exptress, it is crystal clear that the deceased did not fall from the Coromandel Express on 06.10.1997. But the fact remains that the deceased was a bonafide passeger in the Coromandel Express and that the deceased died as a result of fall from the train and therefore, the death resulted from an untoward incident. But in view of the discrepancies as pointed out, it was held that there is no evidence to show from which train he fell down and on what date . It is also inferred that the body of the deceased was found in a railway track, not meant for long distance trains and rejected the claim made by the applicants. 7. It is a fact that the trains, normally meant to go on a particular railway track, for various reasons, could have been diverted to another track. Whether on this particular day, any such diversion has been happened is well within the knowledge of the Railway. But they did not adduce any evidence in this regard. Even though it is contended by R.W.2 that the Coromandel Express passed Road No.3 on 04.10.1997 , Road M.F.A. No. 197 OF 2005 7 No.4 at. 20.28 hours on 05.10.1997 and through Ponneri Railway Station at 17.40 hrs on 06.10.1997, it is an admitted fact that he was not on duty on those days. It is in evidence, the Tribunal found that there is no dispute that the deceased had travelled in Coromandel Express from Howrah and that the entire evidence in this case would also show that the deceased died as a result of fall from the train, but evidence is lacking as to the exact time of death. Even in the Post Mortem certificate issued it is not mentioned. There is a missing gap with regard thereto. Normally, the time of death (approximately) will be noted in the Post Mortem Report. The body was found lying in the track near Ponneri Railway Station. There is absolutely no evidence to show, as to who found out the body first and what was the condition of the body at the time when the Post Mortem was conducted. 8. To attract the provisions of the Act for awarding compensation, what is required to be proved is that the deceased was bonafide passenger in the train; that the death or injury sustained was as a result of accidental fall from a train M.F.A. No. 197 OF 2005 8 carrying passengers, in which case, it will be an untoward incident as defined under Section 123 © (2) of the Railways Act. All the ingredients have been proved in this case. The fact that the deceased was a bonafide passenger in the train, was proved by Ext.P1 railway ticket produced in the case. The Post Mortem certificate, Police FIR, oral evidence etc clinches the issue that the death occurred due to accidental fall from the Train (Coromandel Express). Even though there are some discrepancies regarding the date of death or there was some lack of evidence with regard thereto, it cannot be taken as a ground to reject the claim. So longs as the ingredients of Section 123(c)(2) of the Railways Act are satisfied, irrespective of the date of death, the claimants are entitled to be compensated. 9. Turning to the quantum of compensation to be awarded, for a death case, the compensation fixed as per the provisions of the Railways Act, is four lakhs . The claimants have proved that they are the legal heirs of the deceased. In the said circumstances, we award an amount of Rs. Four lakhs, by way of compensation with interest at the rate of 6% from the date of M.F.A. No. 197 OF 2005 9 filing the application . The said amount shall be deposited within a period of three months from today before the Railway Claims Tribunal, whereupon the Tribunal will release the amount to the applicants , in accordance with law. The Appeal is allowed as above. P.R. RAMAN, JUDGE. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk