The Orissa High Court has reaffirmed that the death of a bona fide passenger in certain railway incidents falls squarely within “untoward incident” under Section 123(c)(2) read with Section 124A of the Railways Act, thereby entitling the claimants to statutory compensation. This judgment upholds the existing interpretive framework and serves as binding authority for matters arising within the jurisdiction of the Orissa High Court, providing clear procedural and substantive guidance for future compensation claims arising from railway accidents.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | FAO/486/2018 of SNEHALATA PADHI Vs UNION OF INDIA |
| CNR | ODHC010264592018 |
| Date of Registration | 18-05-2018 |
| Decision Date | 17-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | Disposed Off |
| Judgment Author | Dr. Justice Sanjeeb K Panigrahi |
| Court | Orissa High Court |
| Bench | Single Bench – Dr. Justice Sanjeeb K Panigrahi |
| Precedent Value | Binding in Orissa; persuasive for other jurisdictions |
| Overrules / Affirms | Sets aside judgment dated 17.10.2017 in O.A. No.164 of 2013 |
| Type of Law | Railway accident claims / Compensation law |
| Questions of Law |
|
| Ratio Decidendi |
The Court held that the deceased, Prafulla Padhi, was a bona fide passenger who died in an “untoward incident” within the meaning of Section 123(c)(2) read with Section 124A of the Railways Act. The Court set aside the lower tribunal’s judgment denying compensation. It categorically stated that, in such factual circumstances, relatives of a bona fide passenger are entitled to statutory compensation from the Railways. The judgment clarifies that the legislative intent behind Section 124A is to provide relief to victims (and dependents) of unforeseen railway accidents and defines the concept of “untoward incident” liberally. Interest at 6% per annum from the date of application (2013) till payment was awarded, enhancing to 12% in case of default. The order is binding within Orissa and serves as a clear precedent for such claims. |
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court | Interpretation of Sections 123(c)(2) and 124A, focusing on statutory compensation principles for bona fide passengers; applicability determined on factual proof of untoward incident and passenger status. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | Deceased Prafulla Padhi died in a railway accident. The lower tribunal had denied compensation. The appellate court found the deceased was a bona fide passenger and the death arose from an untoward incident as per statute. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All lower courts within the jurisdiction of Orissa High Court |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts, Supreme Court of India |
| Overrules | Judgment dated 17.10.2017 in O.A. No.164 of 2013 (Tribunal’s denial of compensation) |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The Orissa High Court reiterates that death of a bona fide passenger can attract automatic statutory compensation under Sections 123(c)(2) and 124A of the Railways Act.
- This judgment underscores the importance of establishing bona fide passenger status and the occurrence of an “untoward incident” for successful compensation claims.
- Specifies the standard rate of statutory compensation (₹8,00,000) and interest parameters (6% p.a., rising to 12% on default).
- Lawyers should note the procedural clarity on calculation of interest from the date of application.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court examined whether the death fell within the meaning of “untoward incident” as defined by Section 123(c)(2) of the Railways Act, and whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger.
- It found sufficient evidence to conclude that both statutory conditions were met.
- The appellate court expressly disagreed with the tribunal’s restrictive interpretation, which had resulted in a denial of compensation.
- The Court focused on the purpose of Section 124A: providing statutory relief to victims of railway accidents irrespective of negligence or fault, provided the victim is a bona fide passenger and the death is due to an untoward incident.
- The judgment provides clarity that insurance-like liability is triggered when the above conditions are satisfied.
- Directed payment of compensation with specified interest rates and set aside the previous adverse order.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Argued that the deceased was a bona fide passenger.
- Submitted that the death occurred during an “untoward incident” as defined under the Railways Act.
- Requested compensation as per statutory provisions.
Factual Background
The dispute centers on the death of Prafulla Padhi in a railway accident. The original tribunal (O.A. No.164 of 2013) had denied compensation to the claimants. On appeal, the Orissa High Court examined the evidence and concluded that Prafulla Padhi was a bona fide passenger who died as a result of an “untoward incident” as per Sections 123(c)(2) and 124A of the Railways Act.
Statutory Analysis
- Section 123(c)(2) of the Railways Act defines “untoward incident,” including accidental deaths not caused by the victim’s own actions.
- Section 124A provides for strict liability compensation in the event of death or injury to a bona fide passenger due to an “untoward incident.”
- The Court interpreted these provisions liberally to ensure victims and dependents receive statutory relief as intended by Parliament.
- The judgment affirms that proof of bona fide passenger status and occurrence of an “untoward incident” triggers the right to compensation.
Procedural Innovations
- The judgment imposes enhanced interest (12% per annum) if compensation is not paid within the court-stipulated three-month period.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Affirms the statutory mechanism for compensation in railway accident claims involving bona fide passengers and untoward incidents.