Decided on March 15,2021

Sabitri Mandal Respondents


BISWANATH RATH,J. - (1.) This is an appeal at the instance of the Insurance Company under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 arising out of judgment passed by the Commissioner for Employees' Compensation-cum-Divisional Labour Commissioner, Jajpur in E.C. Case No.63 of 2014.
(2.) Short background involving the case is that wife and children as claimants filing the claim application brought the case that there is death of Purusottam Mandal in a vehicular accident alleging to have arising out of and in course of employment while discharging his duty as a helper in TATA ACE bearing Registration No.OR-02-AW-8387 belonging to the opposite party no.1. It is further disclosed that on 01.05.2013 while the deceased was coming in the above TATA ACE in the capacity of helper from Kendrapara side towards Cuttack and on the way near Jagatpur at about 7.30 P.M. the driver of the vehicle parked the vehicle on the left side of the road and both of them went to take their tiffin before they start the onward journey. It is stated that after taking tiffin, while the helper and the driver were returning to their vehicle, at that time one unknown vehicle dashed the helper Purusottam Mandal and fled away from the spot. After the accident, the deceased lost his sense and being picked up by PCR Van of Jagatpur Police Station, the helper was shifted to S.C.B. Medical College & Hospital, Cuttack. While undergoing treatment, the helper died on 02.05.2013. On the premises that the deceased was about 30 years at the time of accident was working as helper in the vehicle and was getting Rs.7,000/- as monthly salary from the owner, claim application was filed claiming a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- as compensation under the provisions of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923. 2. On receipt of notice, the owner of the vehicle filed written statement admitting the employment as well as death of the helper in course of and arising out of his employment. The opposite party no.2 on his appearance filed written statement but however strongly disputing the claim of the claimants specifically disputing in course of or arising out of employment. The Insurance Company also taking support of the medical documents as well as police papers and for the disclosures in the Bed-Head ticket attempted to make out a case that there is death on account of taking poison and not involving in course and arising out of employment. Basing on the pleadings available on record, the authority below framed the following issues: (i) Whether the deceased was an "employee" within the meaning of the E.C.Act, 1923? (ii) Whether the accident arose out of and in the course of employment of the deceased under OP No.1 (iii) Whether the applicants are entitled to get any compensation? If so, what would be amount of compensation and by whom payable?
(3.) On the pleadings as well as material available on record, the authority below rendering finding in favour of the claimants, however directed payment of Rs.5,52,510/- by the Insurance Company for there involvement of insurance policy involving the vehicle where the deceased was engaged.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.