Phooli Devi Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court)
No Eyewitness to the Fall, Yet Railway Compensation Cannot Be Denied: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that absence of an eyewitness to a passenger falling from a moving train, non-recovery of the ticket from the deceased’s body and absence of an immediate report to the railway authorities cannot, by themselves, defeat a claim for compensation under the Railways Act, 1989. An accidental fall from a moving train may occur unnoticed, and therefore, the absence of direct evidence cannot be converted into positive evidence against the claimant.
Background of the Case
On 13 November 2019, Ramesh Meena was travelling with his brother-in-law, Babulal, from Jatusana to Kund via Rewari. They purchased a single railway ticket bearing No. UDA23916912 for two adult passengers. After reaching Rewari, they boarded Passenger Train No.59720 for Kund.
According to the claimant, Babulal got down at Kund while Ramesh Meena remained in the train. Later on the same day, Ramesh Meena was found dead near the railway line between Rewari and Khori. His mother, Phooli Devi, filed a claim before the Railway Claims Tribunal seeking compensation on the ground that her son had died due to an accidental fall from a passenger train, constituting an “untoward incident” under Section 123(c) read with Section 124-A of the Railways Act.
Want to Read the Complete Judgment?
You have read the free case summary. Unlock the full judgment, the detailed judicial reasoning and the downloadable PDF, along with every other premium judgment on TaxGuru.
Already subscribed? Log in
One subscription covers the entire premium judgment library, not just this case.
