Sunday, January 3, 2010

Workmen's Compensation Act 1923

Awarding amount more than Claimed:
Section 3 - Claim for compensation - claimants having discharged the initial burden of proving that the deceased workman was in employment of A.P. Trans. Co. and the respondents having failed to adduce any evidence in rebuttal, no exception can be taken to the finding recorded by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation in favour of the claimants. Section 4(1) Just Compensation - No bar on the power of the Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation to award an amount excess the amount claimed by the claimants if the claimants are found entitled to the said amount as per Schedule IV - Leading case Madhr Singh v. Jashwant Singh {1997 ACJ 517 (SC)} referred- Appeal dismissed. - A.P. H.C. dated 02-06-2009 in Civil Misc Appeal No. 243 of 2002 between Oriental Insurance co. v/s N. Sarojini and other. {2009(123)FLR892}
Accident in course of Employment:-
Section 3 and 4 - Accident arising out of and in the course of employment - Deceased was working as transport supervisor - was sent to Gwalior with on Pravidbhai transport in charge, to bring back a stuck off vehicle - He died due to mental and physical strain while engaged in such exercise- Held, there was direct nexus between the death of the deceased and his employment - No perversity in the order of the Commissioner granting compensation of the claimant- Appeal dismissed. Guj. H.C. dated 9-4-09 in FAFO no. 5709 of 2008 with Civil Application no.14427 of 2008 Between Mysore Ammonia Supply Corporation V/s Kashiben Jashbhai Patel. [2009(123)FLR368].
Section 4-A(3) and 3(1) - Compensation - Payment of interest - Employer is liable to pay compensation from the date of accident itself - And interest will be charged from expiry of one month from the date of accident - Interest on awarded sum has to be awarded - And insurance company is directed to pay interest @ 12% till deposit of awarded amount before the Commissioner. Cal. H.C. dated 16-9-2009 in FMAT no. 918/2009 with CAN no. 7496/2009 between Sarbeswar Bhunimali and Ardhendu Kumar Roy. [2009(123)FLR1084]
Section 2(1)(i) and 22 - Compensation under against total disablement - Legality of- Total disablement meaning of- if a workman suffers physical disablement to a lesser extent ie 25%, 40%, 50% etc., if such physical disablement itself totally incapacitate the workman from doing any work for which he was capable of performing before accident it can be treated total disablement - Workman a driver- suffered disablement of 45% - in capable of performing the duties of driver as his right leg was shortened - can never be driver in future - Suffered total disablement - No interference warranted A.P.H.C. dated 8-4-2009 in CMA no. 1266 of 2004 between New India Assurance Co. Ltd V/s A. Narsimhulu. [2009(123)FLR57]
Section 4, 4(1)(c)(ii) and 2(1)(1) Compensation -
claimant 25 year old lorry driver- suffered injuries in vehicular accident- His right leg below knee amputate - loss of one leg meant total disablement and unfit for work of driver - Loss of 100% earning capacity correctly assessed by the Commissioner - Compensation of Rs. 520584 awarded by the commissioner restored. S.C. dated 14-9-2009 in Civil Appeal no. 7641 of 2009 S.Suresh v/s Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. [2010(124)FLR1].
Heart Attack
Compensation - under Workmen's Compensation Act 1923 - death of skilled employee in night shift due to heart attack- liability of employer to pay compensation- consideration of- when deceased has developed chest pain due to stress and strain while discharging the duties night hours- Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation is justified in awarding compensation to the claimants - No interference warranted. Karnataka High Court dated 03-07-2009 in F.A. no. 6770 of 2004(W.C.) between Management of HAL Helicopter Division Bangalore and Smt L. Fathima Mary and others. {2010 (124) FLR 883}

1 comment: