THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA C.M.A. No. 421 of 2006 Oral Judgment: The Union of India, represented by its General Manager, South Central Railway, Secunderabad, has filed this C.M.A., questioning the judgment and award dated 20.12.2005, passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench, in O.A.A. No. 175 of 2000, awarding an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- to the respondents-claimants towards compensation on account of the death of the deceased in a railway accident. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents and perused the judgment and award under appeal. The only ground urged by the learned counsel for the appellant in support of the appeal is that the deceased is not a bona fide passenger, and that even if it is assumed that he is a bona fide passenger, since he died in the railway accident on account of his own negligence, the respondents-claimants are not entitled to any compensation for the death of the deceased, but the Tribunal committed a grave error, in holding that the deceased is a bona fide passenger died in an untoward incident and awarding the compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- to the claimants. The above contention of the appellant cannot be accepted. Admittedly, the deceased fell down while boarding the train and died on the tracks. The body of the deceased was found cut into two pieces. The Tribunal considering the ghastly nature of the accident, felt that it was hard to recover the ticket from the clothes of the deceased. In the absence of the appellant placing any material to prove that the appellant was not holding ticket, the Tribunal following the judgment of this Court, held that an inference has to be drawn that the deceased was a bona fide passenger, and I find no reason whatsoever to interfere with the said finding. As can be seen from the judgment under appeal, the accident in which the deceased died on the tracks took place during the morning hours, and the accident could not have been witnessed by several persons standing on the platform. The death of the deceased in the accident was brought to the notice of the Deputy Station Superintendent, who asked the GRP to remove the body. However, except the evidence of R.W.1, who deposed that no untoward incident has taken place, there was no material placed to show that the deceased died in the accident on account of his own negligence, even though the accident is said to have occurred during day time and witnessed by several persons. This apart, in the absence of any rule prohibiting, boarding or alighting the train from the offside, rather than only from the platform side, and it not being the case of the appellant that the accident occurred while the deceased was crossing the track, the Tribunal held that the death of the deceased should be treated as having caused in an untoward incident. Further this Court, in Parisa Anjali v. Union of India[1], having regard to the provisions of Section 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989, held that even if it is treated that ticket held by the deceased was not a valid one for the train in question, he does not cease to be a passenger for claiming the benefit of compensation, and that railway is liable to pay compensation, even in case of accidental fall/untoward incident occurred while traveling in a passenger train. Having regard to the above settled legal position, I am of the considered opinion that no exception can be taken to the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, holding that the deceased was a bona fide passenger and awarding compensation on account of his death to the claimants, treating the accident in which the deceased died, as an untoward incident. There is no merit in the C.M.A., and the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs. __________________ JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Dated: 27th January, 2011 KSR [1] 2010 (1) ALT 709