Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.19 seconds)Indian Railways Act, 1890.
Jameela & Ors vs Union Of India on 27 August, 2010
7. A reference is also made to the ruling in Jameela
& Ors. v. Union of India, 2010 3 ACC 800 to argue
that when Railway Administration is unable to prove
any of the exception available to it e.g. victim died as a
result of suicide or self inflicted injury, the presumption
must go with the victim, who had accidentally fell
down from the train. In a given case, it may be rash or
negligent act to stand at the open door of the
compartment of train. But certainly it is not a criminal
act so as to exempt Railway Administration from
paying compensation in such cases.
Union Of India vs Prabhakaran Vijaya Kumar & Ors on 5 May, 2008
In another ruling
in Union of India v. Prabhakar Vijaya Kumar and
others, 2008 ACJ 1895 it is held that Railway
Administration was held liable to pay compensation for
untoward incident because it will not make any
difference whether deceased was actually inside the
8 fa393.2023
train or trying to get in such train when fell down.
Thus, if victim died as a result of accidental felling from
the train victim is covered within the meaning of
untoward incident for which Railway is liable to
compensate to the dependents of the victim in case of
compensation for death claim in Prabhakaran's claim
the 'of Strict Liability of the Railway Administration
was considered on the ground that since Railway
Administration undertakes hazardous activity, it must
bear the burden of risk of damage on such activity, may
generate."
1