Consider charging nominal insurance amount at time of booking ticket: HC to Railways
The HC overturned the decision of the tribunal in which a family was denied claim in a 2017 mishap reported in Pathankot and has awarded ₹8 lakh compensation to the family with 9% annual interest from the date of the filing of the claim till disbursal of the same.
The Punjab and Haryana high court has advised the Railways to consider charging of a nominal amount as insurance premium at the time of booking of a railway ticket.
“...the quantum of litigation that gets generated from untoward incidents involving railways, the government needs to explore the possibility of having railway passengers insured compulsorily charging a nominal premium amount at the time the ticket is purchased,” the bench of justice Pankaj Jain said while dealing with an appeal against the decision of a Railway Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench.
“Such exercise shall not only ease out the burden on public exchequer especially the railways department but the same shall also ensure semblance of sort of record of purchaser of railway ticket,” it further added asking that the order passed be sent to the secretary, Railways.
The court overturned the decision of the tribunal in which a family was denied claim in a 2017 mishap reported in Pathankot and has awarded ₹8 lakh compensation to the family with 9% annual interest from the date of the filing of the claim till disbursal of the same.
In the case in hand, one person, Sucha Singh had lost his life in the alleged incident on March 27, 2017. As per the claimants, the victim boarded a train from Tanda to Jammu-Tawi on the fateful day at about 9.45 am. When the train reached Pathankot railway station, due to push from the
other passenger, the victim accidently fell from the moving train and was critically injured. He was taken to the civil hospital, Pathankot, where
he succumbed to his injuries.
Railways had contested the claim and termed him not a bonafide passenger as ticket was not found on him. “The victim has committed suicide by coming in front of the moving train and the incident does not fall within the ambit of untoward incident as contemplated under Section 123(c) read with Section 124 of the Railways Act,” it had claimed.
The court took note of the statement of the driver that no person was hit by the train. “Thus, the story put forth by the railways that the victim having been hit while crossing the track, cannot be believed. The fact that the victim was found lying in injured condition on the platform itself leads credence to the claim of the claimants that in fact the victim was pushed out of the train and thus, sustained injuries in an untoward incident,” it said while reversing the tribunal order of November 11, 2019.
