United India Insurance Co. Ltd, through Regional Manager, Regional v. Most.Krishna Devi

…… Applicant….Respondent. Sri Kamlesh Kumar, S/o Shri Keshwar Yadav, resident of Village- Bhaluhar, P.O. & P.S.- Gurua, District- Gaya (Owner of the Truck). ....Opposite Party No.1 .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ram Chandra Lal Das For the Respondent/s : Mr. Praveen Prakash ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 10 14-08-2013 Heard Mr. Ram Chandra Lal Das, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Though served and having appeared through counsel, there is no representation on behalf of the claimants. This appeal under section 30 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1923 is directed against the judgment and award dated 23.7.2004 passed by the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner, Gaya in C.W.C. Case No.54 of 2002, whereby the claim has been allowed. Patna High Court MA No.403 of 2004 (10) dt.14-08-2013 2 Mr. Ram Chandra Lal Das, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-insurance company has raised a very limited issue on the point of law. He submits that in view of the circular bearing S.O. No.1188, L & E dated 31.12.1991 of the State Government, once a claim is contested, the Deputy Labour Commissioner is under a legal obligation to transfer the matter for adjudication by the Labour Court. Mr. Das in support of his submission has relied upon a Bench decision of this Court reported in 2003(2) PLJR 722 (Most. Parmada Devi vs. Sri Bishwanath Singh). He also relied upon a judgment dated

26.2.2007 rendered in M.A. No.253 of 2003 (Branch Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sajan Ram). The records of the case manifest that the award has been passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum- Commissioner, Workmen’s Compensation, Magadh Division Gaya. Under the orders of this Court the records have been summoned and a perusal thereof manifests that the insurance company having registered its appearance had contested the case by filing written statement. Thus in view of the legal position emanating under the State Government circular, the Deputy Labour Commissioner was duty bound to refer the matter for adjudication before the Labour court but he proceeded to Patna High Court MA No.403 of 2004 (10) dt.14-08-2013 3 adjudicate the same himself and by the award impugned has allowed the claim. It is in such circumstances that this appeal has been filed. The records of the workmen’s compensation case further manifests that the entire claim amount in terms of the award has been paid to the claimant and a certification to that effect has been made by her Advocate, Durgesh Prasad on

20.4.2010. (a) By way of account-payee cheque Rs.59,134/-; (b) fixed deposit in the name of her daughter, Banti Kumari for Rs.50,000/-; (c) fixed deposit in the name of Vikash Kumar, son of the deceased of Rs.20,000/- ;and (d) fixed deposit in the name of widow of Rs.25,000/-. The total amount being Rs.1,79,134/- as awarded under the judgment and award, the certification of the Advocate manifests that the cheque and the fixed deposit receipts were handed over to the claimant as back as on 20.4.2010. This Court thus even while accepting the legal position as canvassed by Mr. Das is of the opinion that in the circumstances where the claim case was instituted as back as in 2002, the award was passed on 23.7.2004 and the amount under Patna High Court MA No.403 of 2004 (10) dt.14-08-2013 4 the award has been paid to the claimant as back as on 20.4.2010, no useful purpose would be served by a remand of this matter for fresh adjudication. With the observation aforementioned, this appeal is disposed of. Let the lower court records be remitted to the court concerned forthwith. SKPathak/- (Jyoti Saran, J)