Even 1.5 Years in Jail Doesn’t Dilute Section 37 NDPS Rigour: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail in 710 Kg Poppy Husk Case Stay of Conviction Nullifies Disqualification Under Section 8(3) RP Act: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Quo Warranto Against Rahul Gandhi Custodial Interrogation Necessary to Uncover ₹2 Crore MGNREGA Scam: Kerala High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail for Vendors in Corruption Case Order 41 Rule 23 CPC | Trial Court Cannot Decide Title Solely on a Vacated Judgment: Himachal Pradesh High Court Strikes By Bar Associations Cannot Stall Justice: Allahabad High Court Holds Office Bearers Liable for Contempt if Revenue Suits Are Delayed Due to Boycotts To Constitute a Service PE, Services Must Be Furnished Within India Through Employees Present in India: Delhi High Court Medical Negligence | State Liable for Loss of Vision in Botched Cataract Surgeries: Gauhati High Court Awards Compensation Waiver of Right Under Section 50 NDPS is Valid Even Without Panch Signatures: Bombay High Court Agricultural Land Is 'Property' Under Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act, 1937: A.P. High Court Tenant Who Pays Rent After Verifying Landlord’s Will Cannot Dispute His Title Under Section 116 Evidence Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court Dismisses Eviction Challenge by HP State Cooperative Bank Clever Drafting Cannot Override Limitation Bar: Gujarat High Court Rejects Suit for Specific Performance Once Divorce by Mutual Consent Is Final, Wife Cannot Pursue Criminal Case for Stridhan Without Reserving Right to Do So: Himachal Pradesh High Court Caste-Based Insults Must Show Intent – Mere Abuse Not Enough for Atrocities Act: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal Failure to Inform Detenu of Right to Represent to Detaining Authority Vitiates NSA Detention: Gauhati High Court Awarding Further Interest On Penal Charges Is Contrary To Fundamental Policy Of Indian Arbitration Law: Bombay High Court

Delhi High Court Critiques RCT’s ‘Flawed’ Reasoning in Railway Death Case, Affirms Deceased as Bona-fide Passenger

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court, led by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dharmesh Sharma, has overturned the Railway Claims Tribunal's (RCT) decision, awarding compensation to the family of a deceased passenger who died in a railway accident. The judgment, pronounced on January 4, 2024, marks a noteworthy development in the realm of railway accident compensation claims.

The case involved an appeal filed under Section 23 of The Railways Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, by the claimants, the family of the late Sh. Ramavatar. The RCT had initially dismissed the claim petition, citing discrepancies in the location of the deceased’s body and the nature of the injuries. The High Court, however, found this reasoning flawed.

Justice Sharma, in his judgment, emphasized, "Ex-facie, the aforesaid reasons are absolutely flawed and belies common sense and logic." He further stated that the deceased was a bona-fide passenger within the meaning of Section 2(29) of the Railways Act, 1989, and that the nature of injuries sustained indicated he was run over by a train, either immediately after falling or sometime thereafter.

The Court noted, "Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained by the deceased, it is evident that he was run by another passing train either immediately after the fall or sometimes thereafter." This observation was crucial in overturning the RCT's decision.

Decision, the Court awarded a statutory compensation of Rs. 8,00,000/- with an interest rate of 9% per annum from the date of the accident, i.e., December 23, 2018, until its realization. The compensation amount was apportioned among the deceased's wife, children, and mother.

Date of Decision: 04 January 2024

ANITA DEVI  & ORS. VS UNION OF INDIA   

 

Latest Legal News