JUDGMENT : 1. The appellants herein are the petitioners in O.A.(II-U) No.326 of 2014 on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench. They have claimed compensation for the death of Santosh Sukumar Nayar, husband of the 1st appellant and father of the 2nd appellant who died on 19.02.2014, due to an accident fall from train between Somanur and Sulur Railway Station. 2. The Railway authorities contested the case. 3. After full trial, the Tribunal dismissed the claim petition, concluding that the victim was not a bonafide passenger. Aggrieved by the said order the appellants have preferred this appeal. 4. The question of law that arises for consideration is as to “whether the Tribunal has failed to appreciate the documents like final report, Post-moterm report as to the cause of death that the deceased accidentally fallen down from the running train and erroneously concluded that the appellants have not been established their claim ?” 5. Before the Railway Tribunal to prove their claim, on the side of the appellants, the 1st appellant examined as A.W.1 and Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.6 documents were marked. On the side of the respondent DRM report of Salem Division was marked. 6. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that based upon all these documents the appellants proved that the deceased died due to the accidental fall from train between the Somanur and Sulur Railway station on 19.10.2014. But the Tribunal has not appreciated those documents and erroneously concluded that the victim was not a bona fide passenger on the date of the alleged accident. So he prayed to allow this appeal. 7. On a perusal of the record, it reveals that on the side of the appellants they produced FIR, Post Moterm Report, Inquest Report and Final report, in order to prove the factum of the death of the deceased 'Santosh Sukumar Nair'. 8. As per the said report the FIR was lodged on 19.02.2014 stating that a male dead body aged about 40 years lying at Somalur and Sulur down line” and as per the inquest report the reason for the death was stated as follows: Other Language 9.” ,wg;gpw;fhd ntspg;gilahd fhuzk;? ,we;JNghdth; Vnjh xU ,uapy; tz;bapy; gazk; nra;J te;jth;. 19.02.2014-k; Njjp fhiy 08.35 kzp Kd;ghf Nrhkzh;-RY}h; ,uapy; epiyaq;fSf;fpilNa fp.kP.460 30-32-y; te;J nfhz;bUf;Fk; NghJ tz;bapypUe;J jtwp tpOe;J ,we;Js;shh; vdj; njhpatUfpwJ. ,we;JNghdth; Vnjh xU ,uapy; tz;bapy; gazk; nra;J te;jth;. 19.02.2014-k; Njjp fhiy 08.35 kzp Kd;ghf Nrhkzh;-RY}h; ,uapy; epiyaq;fSf;fpilNa fp.kP.460 30-32-y; te;J nfhz;bUf;Fk; NghJ tz;bapypUe;J jtwp tpOe;J ,we;Js;shh; vdj; njhpatUfpwJ. 15.kuzk; Vw;gl;l tpjk; Fwpj;Jk;, fhuzk; Fwpj;Jk; rhd;W eLth; Fotpd; fUj;J. ,we;JNghdth; 19.02.2014-k; Njjp fhiy 08.35 kzp Kd;ghf Vnjh xU ,uapy; tz;bapy; gazk; nra;J te;jth;. Nrhkzh-RY}h; ,uapy; epiyaq;fSf;fpilNa fp.kP.460 30-32- y; te;J nfhz;bUf;Fk; NghJ tz;bapypUe;J jtwp fPNo tpOe;J mjdhy; Vw;gl;l gyj;j fhaq;fspdhy; rk;gt ,lj;jpNyNa ,we;Js;shh; vdj; gQ;rhaj;jhu;fshfpa ehq;fs; Vnfhgpj;Jk; jdp jdpahfTk; ,Ue;J njhptpj;J ifnaOj;jpLfpNwhk;.” . “ 9. As per the final report it is stated as follows: “The opinion of the Panchayatars was heard. In this case, the panchayatars opined unanimously and jointly that the deceased died due to fall down from Train”. 10. Further in the said final report it is also observed as follows: “In this case after conclusion of the investigation, it is learnt that the above said deceased Santhosh Sugumaran Nair, aged 40, was having the address as mentioned under the margin permanently and now residing at Kalpakkam, along with his wife and a female child aged 4 years; that he came to Coimbatore for fabrication work and as no one available at Tirupur for fabrication work, he decided to go to Coimbatore to bring workmen and travelled in a train on 18.02.2014 from a Train and as there was crowd in the train, he was travelling near the door and on 19.02.2014 prior to 8.25” a.m., the above said person fell down from the train at the place of incident between Somalur and Sulur railway Staations at KM 460/30-32 downline railway. Therefore, it is decided that the death which was caused due to down from the train is an accidental death”. 11. Therefore, the appellants with the help of those documents clearly established that the victim travelled in one of the trains on the fatefull day i.e., 19.02.2014 while he was travelling near the doorways, accidentally fallen down from the running train between Somalur & Sulur railway station. Thus, it was proved that the deceased travelled in the train but due to an accident fall from the train, he died. 12. The learned counsel for the railways submitted that the claimants have failed to prove that the deceased travelled with a valid ticket and this fact was rightly appreciated by the Tribunal. 13. Thus, it was proved that the deceased travelled in the train but due to an accident fall from the train, he died. 12. The learned counsel for the railways submitted that the claimants have failed to prove that the deceased travelled with a valid ticket and this fact was rightly appreciated by the Tribunal. 13. The Division Bench of this court in the case of The Union of India Owning Southern Railway Vs. G.Jayalakshmi and others, reported in 2012(3) CTC 741 , held as follows: Railways Act, 1989 (24 of 1989), Section 123(c) & 124-A - “Untoward incident” - Claimant's deceased husband fallen down from train due to overcrowding and died – Deceased lost ticket during accident – Contention of Railways that incident happened due to negligence on part of deceased and claimant has failed to prove that deceased was travelling with valid ticket – Held: Normal presumption is that passenger in Train holds valid ticket – Burden is on Railways to prove that deceased is not bona fide passenger – Accidental fallinig of passengers from Train carrying passengers would come within purview of “Untoward incident” and Claimants entitled to claim compensation.” This decision squarely apply to the facts of this case. The normally presumption is that passenger in a train holds valid ticket. 14. Considering the above submission made by the counsels and coming to the facts of the case, the FIR, inquest report and the final report conclusively establish that the death of the deceased happened due to accidental fall from the train and not happened due to the self-inflicted injury of the deceased which are all coming under clause A(2)(E) of the proviso under Section 124(A) of Act. 15. The appellants prima facie established, that at the time of the accident the deceased was in possession of the ticket, but it is impossible to collect the ticket from the accident spot or from the body of the deceased in the normal course of investigation. Therefore, the objection raised by the railway authority that the deceased was not a bonafide passenger is unsustainable one. The facts and circumstances proves that deceased died due to the untoward incident, an accidental fallen down from the train and the appellants are entitled to get a compensation under Section 124(A) which speaks about the compensation on account of untoward incident. The facts and circumstances proves that deceased died due to the untoward incident, an accidental fallen down from the train and the appellants are entitled to get a compensation under Section 124(A) which speaks about the compensation on account of untoward incident. The claimants also established that the accident occurred not due to any of the reason mentioned in A to E of the proviso under Section 124-A of the Act. But the Tribunal without appreciating the fact erroneously concluded that appellants did not prove the claim. The finding given by the Tribunal is hereby set aside. 16.Accordingly, the order dated 28.08.2015 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal in O.A.(II-U) No.326 of 2014 is set aside and the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands allowed. The appellants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition. The compensation is to be apportioned as under: (i) The 1st appellant/wife is entitled for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/-(Rupees Four Lakhs only). (ii) The 2nd appellant, who is minor, entitled for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs only ). 17. The respondent / Railways is directed to deposit the compensation amount of Rs.8,00,000/-(Rupees Eight Lakhs only) along with the accrued interest at the rate of 6% per annum before the Railway Tribunal concerned within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and on such deposit, the first claimant is permitted to withdraw her respective portion of the award amount with accrued interest by filing an appropriate application before the Tribunal and the payments are to be made through RTGS. As far as the minor share of compensation is concerned, the same is to be deposited in any one of the Nationalized Banks in an interest bearing deposit scheme and the same is to be renewed periodically till the minor attained the age of majority. No costs.