Judicial Insight
Back to feed
IndiaCivil

Sukhabhai Nanjibhai Makwana vs Union Of India

Court
Supreme Court of India
Decided
Sep 25, 2026
Citation
2026 INSC 1056
Judges
Ujjal Bhuyan, Atul S. Chandurkar

AI breakdown

  • The dispute was about whether the victim's family should receive compensation for his fatal fall from a train.
  • The Supreme Court decided to restore the compensation to the family.
  • The High Court had erred in overturning the Tribunal's award, which found the victim was a genuine passenger.

Outcome

The Civil Appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

Taken from the judgment's conclusion. Check the full text for the exact order.

Parties

  • Applicant

    Sukhabhai Nanjibhai Makwana

  • Respondent

    Union Of India

Judgment text (excerpt)
Sukhabhai Nanjibhai Makwana vs Union Of India on 25 September, 2026 2026 INSC 1056 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.12951 OF 2026 SUKHABHAI NANJIBHAI MAKWANA AND ANOTHER APPELLANTS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA RESPONDENT JUDGMENT ATUL S. CHANDURKAR, J. 1. The appellants are the unfortunate parents of one Maheshbhai, who while travelling to Surat via Ahmedabad on 27.09.2017 was a victim of an ‘untoward incident’. While travelling in the general compartment of the train, he fell down on account of a sudden jerk and jolt when the said train was between Sabarmati and Ahmedabad Railway Stations. He sustained multiple grievous injuries and was admitted in hospital. He, however, succumbed to his injuries on 31.10.2017. The claim application preferred by the parents under Section 16 of the Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by ABHINAV KUMAR Date: 2026.09.25 12:31:58 IST Reason: Page 1 of 13 Civil Appeal No.12951 of 2026 Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 19871 was allowed by the Railway Claims Tribunal2 on 17.06.2022. It held that Maheshbhai was victim of an ‘untoward incident’ and had suffered an accidental fall. The claimants were held entitled to compensation of ₹8 lakhs along with interest @9% per annum from the date of the incident till the date of the order. The Union of India being aggrieved, preferred an appeal under Section 23 of the Act of 1987. A learned Single Judge of the Gujarat High Court3 by the order dated 15.07.2025 allowed the said appeal by holding that there was no evidence as to the fall of the victim from the train and, therefore, the incident could not be called an ‘untoward incident’ as defined under Section 123(c)(2) of the Railways Act, 19894. The claimants being aggrieved are in app…
Read the full judgmentpowered by IKanoon

Source: Indian Kanoon (indiankanoon.org). Indian court judgments are public records; the summary and translations are AI-generated.