K Sundaramurthy, a differently-abled person, wanted to attend the Independence Day celebrations at Chennai seven years ago, but, alas, he died in the midway as he slipped and fell on the railway track. And, thanks to the Madras High Court, his mother has been awarded Rs 4 lakh as compensation seven years later.
Justice Aruna Jagadeesan dismissed an appeal by the Southern Railways challenging the compensation awarded by the Railway Claims Tribunal.
K Chellammal’s case was that on August 12, 2005 her son Sundaramurthy, wanted to visit Chennai to attend the Independence Day celebrations. Since he did not carry the required certificate, he was denied a concessional ticket and he bought an ordinary ticket from Ariyalur to Chennai. While attempting to board the train, he slipped. His body got cut and he died instantaneously. He was carrying substantial amount of cash for his travel along with his personal belongings. The ticket purchased by him was lost.
On April 16, 2009, the Chennai Bench of the Railway Claims Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs 4 lakh to Chellammal. Aggrieved, the Southern Railway preferred the the present appeal contending that no ticket was recovered and the Tribunal’s finding that the deceased was a ‘bona fide passenger’ was not proved. It contended that the accident occurred only due to Sundaramurthy’s negligence as he deliberately tried to board the moving train. Hence, it would amount to ‘self-inflicted injury.’
Justice Aruna Jagadeesan said “self-inflicted injury would mean injuries which are self-inflicted by the person when he is capable of rational voluntary action. The same would be a wound inflicted by one’s self. When a person accidentally falls from a train because of some jerk or slipped down while boarding etc., it would not amount to ‘self-inflicted injury,’ but an ‘untoward incident’. Once it is held that the fall of the deceased was a result of untoward incident, the claimant would be entitled to compensation,” said Justice Aruna in her judgment.
The judge said that in the present case, it had been proved from investigation by the Railway Police itself that the victim died due to fall from the train. The FIR, inquest and post-mortem reports and the charge-sheet concluded that the case as an accidental fall from train. Without any material to indicate or infer any foul play or any collusive act, the Railways could not contend that it was not an accidental fall. Referring to the contention that no ticket was recovered from the body, the Judge said it was the Railways’ duty to first give evidence that Sundaramurthy was without a valid ticket.