21.01.2025 United Indi ited ed India Insurance Company Limited v. Gopal Sing l Singh and others
Case Details
FAO-2857-2020 (O&M) 1 [251] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PU AT CHANDIGAR IGARH OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA FAO-2857 Date of De 2857-2020 (O&M) of Decision : 21.01.2025 United Indi ited ed India Insurance Company Limited …Appellant versus Gopal Sing l Singh and others ….Respondents Coram : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PA PANKAJ JAIN Present: Mr. Nitin Gupta, Advocate for the appellant. ocate Mr. Ashish Grover, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3. None for respondent No.4. **** PANKAJ J KAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) [1] Instant appeal is directed again d against order dated 28.02.2020 passe passed by the Co he Commissioner under the Emplo Employees Compensation Act, 192 t, 1923, Bathinda. C inda. Claim petition was preferred by red by the three claimants, out of whic f which, two are th are the minor sons of the deceased ceased. They sought compensation o tion on account of unt of death of Buta Singh. As As per them, Buta Singh died o died on 03.12.2010 .2010 in an accident arising out g out of and during the course o urse of employmen oyment, while working as Cleaner/As /Asstt. Driver with Truck No.PB- -08- 177. AD-3177. [2] [3] issues:- The claim petition was resisted esisted by the respondents. On the basis of pleadings, C ings, Commissioner framed followin llowing RAJNEESH SHARMA 2025.01.27 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document “1. Whether application is n is not maintainable? OPR” FAO-2857-2020 (O&M) 2 2. Whether applicant is en is entitled to the amount claimed if d if so to what extent and from rom whom? OPA 3. Relief. ” [4] Commissioner allowed the cla the claim petition filed by the claimant aimants, granting th ting them compensation of Rs.7,88,24 ,88,240/- alongwith interest @ 12% p 12% per annum from m from the date of application dated 0 dated 08.01.2015. The impugned ord ed order passed by d by the Commissioner is being ass ng assailed, claiming that the accide accident took place place on 03.12.2010 and the pre he present application was filed o iled on 22.12.2014 .2014. Section 10 provides for the r the limitation for filing of claim. I aim. In terms of Se s of Section 10(1), no claim for comp r compensation is entertainable beyon beyond the period o eriod of 02 years. [5] Counsel for the appellant sub nt submits that no sufficient cause wa was pleaded to ed to seek condonation of delay delay. He thus, submits that th hat the Commissio missioner erred in entertaining the cl the claim application and allowing th ing the same despi despite being stale claim. [6]
Legal Reasoning
Per contra, Mr. Grover, cou r, counsel for respondent Nos.1 to .1 to 3 submits tha its that the Commissioner was fully fully aware of the fact that two of th o of the claimants a ants are minor sons. The third claima claimant is a senior citizen (father of th er of the deceased) a ased) and it is on account of the afor e aforesaid fact that a specific findin finding was also re also recorded by the Commissioner ioner to the said effect. He refers efers to findings rec ngs recorded on Issue No.2. [7] I have heard counsel for the or the parties and have carefully gon lly gone through the gh the records of the case. [8] It is a matter of record that d that two of the claimants were sti ere still minors wh rs when the claim petition was pref s preferred. It is undeniable that tw that two RAJNEESH SHARMA 2025.01.27 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document claimants c ants could have preferred the claim pe laim petition even after attaining the ag the age FAO-2857-2020 (O&M) 3 of majority ajority. The same would not have ef effected the claim on merits or th ts or the quantum of tum of the compensation. Section 10 of the Employees C yees Compensation Act, 1923 reads a reads as [9] under:- “10. Notice and claim.— (1) No claim for compensation tion shall be entertained by a Commission ssioner unless notice of the acci accident has been given in the mann anner hereinafter provided as so s soon as practicable after the happeni pening thereof and unless the clai claim is preferred before him within tw in two years of the occurrence of e of the accident or in case of death with within two years from the date of d of death: Provided that where the acc e accident is the contracting of a disease ease in respect of which the provis ovisions of sub-section (2) of section 3 a 3 are applicable, the accident sha t shall be deemed to have occurred on t on the first of the days during w ng which the employee was continuou uously absent from work in conseq nsequence of the disablement caused by t by the disease: Provided further that in c in case of partial disablement due to t to the contracting of any such d ch disease and which does not force t ce the employee to absent himself self from work, the period of two years sh s shall be counted from the day day the employee gives notice of t of the disablement to his employer oyer: Provided further that if an e an employee who, having been employed oyed in an employment for a con continuous period, specified under su r sub- section (2) of section 3 in r in respect of that employment, ceases to s to be so employed and develops lops symptoms of an occupational disea disease peculiar to that employmen yment within two years of the cessation tion of employment, the accident sh nt shall be deemed to have occurred on t on the day on which the symptoms oms were first detected: Provided further that the w notice shall not be a bar to t e want of or any defect or irregularity in r to the entertainment of a claim ity in a (a) RAJNEESH SHARMA 2025.01.27 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document if the claim is pref preferred in respect of the death of a f a an employee resulting f ing from an accident which occurred on t on the premises of the em e employer, or at any place where t re the employee at the time time of the accident was working under t der the control of the emplo mployer or of any person employed by hi y him, and the employee die e died on such premises or at such place, ace, or on any premises belo belonging to the employer, or died witho ithout 4 having left the vicin vicinity of the premises or place where t ere the accident occurred, o ed, or if the employer or or any one of several employers or a or any FAO-2857-2020 (O&M) (b) person responsible t ble to the employer for the management ent of any branch of the t the trade or business in which the injur injured employee was empl employed had knowledge of the accide ccident from any other so r source at or about the time when hen it occurred: Provided further that the C he Commissioner may entertain and deci decide any claim to compensation ation in any case notwithstanding that t hat the notice has not been given, en, or the claim has not been preferred, red, in due time as provided in thi n this sub-section, if he is satisfied that t hat the failure so to give the notice tice or prefer the claim, as the case may b ay be, (2) (3) (4) use. was due to sufficient cause. Every such notice shall giv l give the name and address of the pers person injured and shall state in or in ordinary language the cause of the inju injury and the date on which the a the accident happened, and shall be serv served on the employer or upon an n any one of several employers, or upon a on any person responsible to the the employer for the management of a of any branch of the trade or busin business in which the injured workman w an was employed. The State Government may may require that any prescribed class lass of employers shall maintain at in at their premises at which employees a ees are employed a notice book, in k, in the prescribed form, which shall hall be readily accessible at all rea l reasonable times to any injured employ ployee employed on the premises ses and to any person acting bona fide fide on his behalf. A notice under this section ction may be served by delivering it at, at, or sending it by registered po d post addressed to, the residence or a or any office or place of business o ess of the person on whom it is to be serve served, or, where a notice-book i ok is maintained, by entry in the notic notice- book.” [10] A bare perusal of the same re ame reveals that the Commissioner ha ner has been clothe clothed with the power to condone th one the delay subject to his satisfactio isfaction of there bei ere being a sufficient cause. Preamble eamble attached to the 1923 Act revea t reveals that the ob the objective of the Act is to provide rovide peace and social security to th y to the RAJNEESH SHARMA 2025.01.27 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document workman a man and their families. This Court is is of the opinion that the exercise o se of FAO-2857-2020 (O&M) 5 power unde r under Section 10(1) proviso to con to condone the delay is not depend pendant upon and and is not bound by the strict strict principles of pleadings. Onc Once Commissio missioner after appreciating the facts e facts and circumstances of the cas the case comes to th s to the conclusion that there is a suff sufficient cause to condone the dela e delay, mere absen absence of the plea raised in the claim e claim petition does not bind him fro im from exercising sing his discretion. Present is a case a case where young workman, aged 3 aged 35 years, died , died in an accident, leaving behind t ehind two minors and an old age fathe e father. The claim claim petition filed by minors was e was entertained by the Commissione issioner, rightly reco ly recognizing their right to seek com compensation on account of death o death of their father father in an accident arising out of em of employment. [11] Mr. Grover, counsel for res or respondent Nos.1 to 3 has right rightly contended ed that even on attaining the age e age of majority, the claimants wou s would have been been within their right to prefer the cl the claim petition. Thus, in view of th w of the above, find e, finding no substantial question stion involved which is necessary ssary to maintain ap tain appeal under Section 30 of the 192 the 1923 Act, the same is dismissed. [12] All pending miscellaneous neous application(s), if any, stand stands
Decision
disposed of ed off. .2025 21.01.2025 ‘R. Sharma' (PANKAJ JAIN) JUDGE Whether speaking/ reasoned Whether reportable : : Yes/No Yes/No RAJNEESH SHARMA 2025.01.27 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document