SHRI. DHONDU SAKHARAM TAMBE AND ANR. vs THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER,

Judgment text excerpt

HMK 1 40. FA-1668-2016-modified.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Digitally FIRST APPEAL NO. 1668 OF 2016 SAYYED signed SAYYED by SAEED SAEED ALI ALI AHMED ALI AHMED Date: ALI 2025.11.24 16:07:03 +0530 1. Dhondu Sakharam Tambe 2. Rupali Dhondu Tambe R/a. Om Sai Co-op. Housing Society Ltd., Room No.321, Indira Nagar, Behind Wipshana School, Meghwadi, Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai – 400 060. ….Appellants Versus The Union Of India, Represented By The General Manager, Western Railway, Churchgate, Mumbai .…Respondent __________________________________________________________________ Mr. Balasaheb Deshmukh i/by Mr. Deepak T. Ajagekar for the Appellants. T. J. Pandian a/w. Mr. Gautam Modanwal a/w. Ms. Noorjahan Khan for the Respondent. __________________________________________________________________ CORAM : JITENDRA JAIN, J. RESERVED ON : 18th NOVEMBER, 2025 PRONOUNCED ON : 21st NOVEMBER, 2025 JUDGMENT : 1. This appeal challenges an order of the Railway Claims Tribunal dated 29th January, 2016 whereby the application made by the appellants/ applicants seeking compensation from the respondent on account of death of their son Jaideep Tambe was dismissed on the ground that the deceased was not a bonafide passenger and also there is no record of the “untoward incident” having occurred as per the records of the officials of the respondent. The relevant Act under which the claim was made is The HMK 2 40. FA-1668-2016-modified.doc Railways Act, 1989, and the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987. 2. The issues which arises in this Appeal are :- (a) Whether the appellants/applicants have proved that Jaideep Tambe died on account of an “untoward incident” so as to be eligible for compensation ? (b) Whether the deceased was a bonafide passenger ? 3. I hav