Synopsis

This judgment by the Bombay High Court allows an appeal filed by the family of a deceased railway passenger against an order of the Railway Claims Tribunal. The Tribunal had rejected the claim for compensation on the ground that the death was not an "untoward incident" but rather a case of "trespassing" (being knocked down while crossing the tracks). The High Court reversed this finding, holding that in the absence of any eyewitness to prove trespassing, and given the Station Master's own report stating the cause as "not known," the death must be presumed to be an "untoward incident." The court also clarified that the burden of proving boarding cannot be an impossible onus on the claimants. The appeal was allowed, and compensation was awarded.

1. Heading for the judgment

Citation: Mrs. Corinna Valentina D'Souza & Ors. v. Union of India, Through the General Manager, Western Railway, First Appeal No. 1232 of 2014, decided on 18.03.2026 (Bombay High Court)
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jitendra Jain (Single Judge)
Core Law: Railways Act, 1989 (Sections 123 and 124A).

Bombay High Court holds that death of passenger cannot be termed "trespassing" without eyewitness; Station Master's "not known" report supports claim for compensation as "untoward incident."

2. Legal framework

This judgment applies the beneficial provisions of the Railways Act to a fatal accident claim.

• Railways Act, 1989:
  Section 123(c): Defines "untoward incident." It includes the accidental falling of any passenger from a train carrying passengers. The key dispute was whether t

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.