The Punjab & Haryana High Court awarded ₹8 lakh as compensation to the family of Gaurav Kumar, who died in a railway accident, overturning the Railway Claims Tribunal’s decision. Justice Pankaj Jain emphasized that a minor discrepancy in the ticket number should not disqualify the deceased from being considered a bona fide passenger.
“Once it stands proved that the deceased was holding a valid ticket, the claim shouldn’t be dismissed for a clerical error,” the Court observed.
Read Also:- Delhi High Court Orders Rs.8 Lakh Compensation to Man Who Lost Leg After Falling from Overcrowded Train
Background of the Case
The appellants, Ramchander Shukla and another, filed a claim petition after Gaurav Kumar died in an untoward incident while traveling by train. They argued that he held a valid Monthly Seasonal Ticket (MST), which was lost during the accident. However, the Railway Claims Tribunal rejected their plea, citing mismatched ticket details.
The Tribunal noted that the MST number provided (X-60782408) was issued to another individual, Harsh Sharma. The appellants countered this by proving that the preceding ticket number (X-60782405) belonged to Gaurav Kumar, indicating a mere typographical error in the claim.
Justice Jain accepted the appellants’ argument, stating:
“The records confirm the deceased held a valid MST. A single-digit error shouldn’t invalidate his status as a bona fide passenger.”
The Court also referenced the Supreme Court’s judgment in Union of India v. Rina Devi (2018), which mandates compensation for deaths in railway accidents unless self-inflicted injuries are proven. Since no such evidence existed here, the Tribunal’s rejection was deemed unjust.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Stays Deportation of Assam Woman Declared Foreigner by Tribunal
The Court directed the Railways to pay:
- ₹4 lakh with 7.5% annual interest from the accident date, or
- ₹8 lakh, whichever is higher.
The amount must be deposited within 12 weeks; failure would attract a 9% interest penalty.
Key Takeaways
- Minor errors in documentation shouldn’t deny rightful compensation.
- Railways must proactively verify passenger records before rejecting claims.
- The ruling reinforces passenger rights under Section 124-A of the Railways Act.
For Appellants: Mr. Ujval Mittal, Advocate
For Railways: Mr. Amit Sharma, Senior Panel Counsel
Title: Ramchander Shukla and another v. Union of India through the General Manager,
