- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31490 MFA No. 9648 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 9648 OF 2017 (RCT) BETWEEN: THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY, HUBLI - 580 020. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. D. BASAVARAJA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MANJULA WIFE OF LATE B. RAVICHANDRA KUMAR, 40 YEARS 2. SRI. R. GOVINDASWAMY SON OF LATE B. RAVINDRA KUMAR, 24 YEARS 3. KUM. R. SASIKALA DAUGHTER OF LATE B. RAVINDRA KUMAR, 21 YEARS, 4. SMT. JAYAMMA MAJOR, WIFE OF LATE BJ PATEL ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.21/1, SHIVANAGAR, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. TANVEER PASHA A.S, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 TO R4) Digitally signed by RAMYA D Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31490 MFA No. 9648 of 2017 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 23(1) OF RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ACT AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.06.2017 PASSED IN OA II U 157/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.8,00,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% FROM THE DATE OF FILING APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF AWARD AND THEREAFTER 9% P.A. TILL THE DATE OF ACTUAL PAYMENT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT The present appeal is filed by appellant/Union of India questioning the judgment dated 19.06.2017 passed in OA II U 157/2015 by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal' for short). 2. It is the case of the claimants that on 13.07.2015, the deceased in order to attend the function at Keelghatta of Maddur Taluk, Mandya District, came to Bangalore City Railway Station, with a journey ticket and while boarding some train bound for Maddur at Platform No.8, slipped accidentally and fell down from the train and sustained fatal injuries and succumbed to the injuries. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31490 MFA No. 9648 of 2017 3. The Tribunal after considering the evidence on record, had granted compensation of Rs.8 lakhs along with simple interest at 6% from the date of filing application to till the date of award and, thereafter @ 9% p.a., till the date of actual payment of the same. 4. The grounds urged in the appeal memorandum and learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the deceased was not a bonafide passenger as journey ticket was not recovered from the body of the deceased and the deceased had been run over at Platform No.8. Therefore, the deceased is not a bonafide passenger. Hence, ordering compensation is not correct. 5. Upon perusal of the evidence on record that FIR, complaint, Inquest Report and statement of police proves the fact that deceased while boarding the train, slipped accidentally and fell down and died in the train accident. Ex.R1- DRM's Report also depicts that the deceased died in the train accident. Just because the journey ticket was not recovered from the body of the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31490 MFA No. 9648 of 2017 deceased, it cannot be said deceased is not bonafide passenger. When the claimant had deposed with affidavit that the deceased has traveled along with ticket that is sufficient to consider that the deceased is a bonafide passenger in the absence of contra evidence by the Railway Authorities. Therefore, the Tribunal has correctly assessed the evidence and granted compensation, which needs no interference from this Court. Therefore, the appeal is found to be merit-less. 6. Hence, the Miscellaneous First Appeal is dismissed. Pending IAs., if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE KA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21 CT: BHK