Bombay High Court

THE UNION OF INDIA THR.THE GENERAL MANAGER, MUMBAIversusMR.ANIL TRIKAM KALIWADA

Decided: 8 January 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: JITENDRA SHANTILAL JAIN

Holding

The court upheld that a platform‑ticket holder is a bonafide passenger and the incident was accidental, not negligence, thereby confirming the Tribunal’s order.

Summary

On 16 August 2013, the plaintiff, holding a platform ticket, entered a moving Vadodara Express to see off a relative and attempted to alight while the train was in motion, resulting in a fall that led to the amputation of both legs. The Railway Claims Tribunal held that the plaintiff was a bonafide passenger and that the injury was an accidental untoward incident, not attributable to negligence on the part of the railway. The Union of India appealed, arguing that a platform‑ticket holder cannot be considered a passenger and that the railway should not be liable. The High Court observed that a platform ticket permits entry into the carriage for purposes such as assisting a passenger, and that the accident was accidental, not negligent. Consequently, the Court affirmed the Tribunal’s order and dismissed the appeal, allowing the plaintiff to seek withdrawal of the deposited amount with interest.

Issues considered

Whether a person holding a platform ticket is a bonafide passenger for purposes of a railway claim.
Whether the injury sustained while attempting to alight a moving train constitutes negligence attributable to the railway.

Subjects

platform ticket
bonafide passenger
railway negligence
Railway Claims Tribunal
personal injury
accidental injury
appeal

Judgment

15-FA-629-21.DOCX

rsk

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

FIRST APPEAL NO.629 OF 2021
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.4217 OF 2021

The Union Of India Thr.The Appellant-Orig.
General Manager, Mumbai … Respondent
Versus
Mr.Anil Trikam Kaliwada Respondent-Orig.
… Claimant
_____________________________________________________
Ms. Delilah Fernandes , for Appellant.
Mr. Sainand Chougule, for Respondent.
______________________________________________________

CORAM : Jitendra Jain, J.
DATED : 08 January 2026
ORAL ORDER:-

1. Admit. By consent of the parties taken up for final
hearing.

2. This appeal is filed by the Union of
India-appellant/respondent challenging an order of the
Railway Claims Tribunal (Tribunal) dated 26 November 2020
whereby the claim made by the applicant/respondent was
Digitally
signed by
allowed.
RAJESHWARI
RAJESHWARI SUBODH
SUBODH KARVE
KARVE Date:
2026.01.08
17:14:34
3. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and
+0530

the respondent.

Page 1
15-FA-629-21.DOCX

4. On 16 August 2013, the injured along with his two
friends purchased platform tickets to see off his maternal
cousin who was to travel by Vadodara Express to Surat. While
his two friends were purchasing snacks, the injured was
inside the train to see off his maternal cousin and train
started as per its time. The injured in a hurry to get down
from the train made an attempt to alight while the train was
moving and in that process fell down and his two legs were
injured and had to be amputated. This information was
received by the Station Master and the patient was sent to
Nair hospital.

5. The Tribunal has accepted that the injured fell down
from the moving train and sustained injuries to his legs
which constituted “untoward incident”. The Tribunal also
accepted that the injured was a “bonafide passenger” since
he had purchased platform ticket.

6. The learned counsel for the appellant states that a
person holding platform ticket cannot remain in the train. In
my view, when a person purchases platform ticket to see off
somebody it is not that he remains on the station only but
generally enters the compartment to assist the passenger to
keep luggage and to see off. At times it may happen that the
person holding platform ticket is inside the train chitchatting
with the passenger and the train starts. In the instant case,
the injured did not want to be in the compartment when the
train was moving and therefore tried to alight the train and in
the process suffered the injuries. On the platform ticket it is

Page 2
15-FA-629-21.DOCX

nowhere mentioned that the person purchasing platform
ticket while the train is at station cannot enter the
compartment. The incident is accidental only and not
negligent.

7. In my view, the findings of the Tribunal are not
dislodge to be perverse. There is no dispute that the injured
was a bonafide passenger since he had purchased platform
ticket. There is also no dispute that the injured was trying to
alight the train when the train started moving. Therefore, it
cannot be said that the person holding platform ticket was
trying to travel in the train. In my view this incident cannot
be treated as “negligence”. I approve the reasoning given by
the Tribunal.

8. In view of above, the order of the Tribunal dated 26
November 2020 is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed.

9. The respondent/applicant is permitted to make
application to the Tribunal for withdrawal of the amount
deposited by the appellant as per the Tribunal’s order along
with the interest till the date of payment.

10. Appeal is disposed of. Consequently, Interim/Civil
Application does not survive.

(Jitendra Jain, J.)

Page 3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…