Tanisha Rana
Published on: October 16, 2022 at 17:35 IST
The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has ruled that a married daughter of a railway accident victim would still be entitled to compensation under the Railways Act even though she might not be dependent on him.
“If Section 123(b)(i) of the Railway Act is perused, it is the definition of dependant wherein daughter is included. There is no qualification either married or unmarried daughter. As such claimant is entitled for compensation,” said Justice M.S. Jawalkar.
The court cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in Manjiri Bera vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., in which the top court determined that the married daughter was entitled to compensation as a legal representative and that her lack of dependency could not be used as a justification for withholding it.
Background
Mina Shahare, a 45-year-old labourer from the Maharashtra district of Gondia, filed a complaint with the High Court in 2013 after the Railway Claims Tribunal rejected her claim for Rs. 8,00,000/- with interest from the accident date.
In 2011, as her father was travelling by passenger train from Gondia to Wadsa, according to Shahare’s complaint, he fell off and died instantaneously as a result of the rush.
According to the petition, he was standing close to the coach’s door when the incident took place.
The railways administration said that the deceased was a ticketless passenger who perished as a result of his own carelessness.
It further claimed that Sections 123 and 124 of the Railways Act of 1989 do not apply to the purported incident. Shahare was further informed that she was married and was not eligible for any compensation.
The bench concluded that the lack of a ticket cannot be a reason for denying compensation, citing the SC ruling in Rina Devi.
The bench noted, citing another judgment, that if the deceased died by falling off the train, his family could not be compelled to present a ticket.
“As such there cannot be said to be negligence on the part of deceased when it is strict liability of railway. In view of the above referred judgments, it has to be inferred that deceased was a bonafide passenger and he fell down from running train was an untoward incident,” the bench observed directing Railways to pay the petitioner compensation of Rs. 8 lakh.