Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.32 seconds)

The Union Of India Owning vs The Addl. Registrar on 11 July, 2012

In Union of India Owning Southern Railway v. The Addl. Registrar, Railways Claims Tribunal, (2012) 5 Mad LJ 562, the passenger travelled in Chennai-Mangalore Express from Chennai to Karur. The train had an unscheduled halt at Veeravakiyam Railway Station. After some time, the train started moving. The deceased fell down from the moving train and died on the spot.
Madras High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 36 - P Devadass - Full Document

Raj Pal Goel And Anr. vs Union Of India on 15 January, 2014

4. Section 124-A of the Railways Act is based on the principle of no fault liability and the compensation cannot be denied to the appellant on the ground that the deceased was negligent and it is wholly irrelevant as to who was at fault. Section 123(c) of the Railways Act defines 'untoward incident' to include the accidental falling of any passenger from a train carrying passengers. The word 'passenger' has been defined under Section 2 (29) of the Railways Act defines as a person travelling with a valid pass or ticket. The Explanation to Section 124A clarifies that the word 'passenger' includes a railway servant on duty; and a person who has purchased a valid ticket for travelling by a train or a valid platform ticket and becomes a victim of an untoward incident. As such, there are three categories of persons who are defined as passengers: - (i) a person with a valid ticket to travel; (ii) a person who holds a railway pass to travel and (iii) a person who holds a platform ticket. In every one of the categories, so long as he is in railway premises or a train, he shall be taken as a passenger. His or her presence in the railway premises or a train shall be taken as authorized. It is for this reason that there are decisions which make an extended meaning to the definition passenger to a person who comes into the plat form and gets into a wrong train, Gaurav Kapoor v Union of India, III (2014) ACC 639 (Del) or a person who purchases a passenger train ticket and gets into an express train Santoshi v Union of India, FAO 267/2014 (Del); person travelling atop a train and not inside a passenger compartment Raj Pal Goel v. Union of India, 2014 ACJ 2315 or a person breaking journey without an FAO 113/2017 Page 2 of 14 endorsement and getting into another in continuation of the journey to the destination station Dwarika Mahto v. Union of India, 2013 ACJ 768. In all these situations, it is possible to feed meaning and logic to the decisions, only if we recognise that primacy always is the lawful authority to enter the railway premises when the incident of travel itself becomes secondary. The judicial tool of liberal construction for a welfare legislation could alone justify these decisions in order that the categories of persons to whom the benefit is intended to apply, being generally poor where only a modest compensation is provided under the Act, ought not to be denied even such a small benefit.
Delhi High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 9 - V J Mehta - Full Document
1   2 Next