POONAM DEVI Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
LAWS(SC)-2020-3-52
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on March 06,2020

POONAM DEVI Appellant
VERSUS
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER VS. KIRAN [LAWS(KAR)-2020-12-58] [REFERRED TO]
JOTHI VS. K. P. SARASWATHI [LAWS(MAD)-2021-2-30] [REFERRED TO]
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS. SEEMA [LAWS(BOM)-2022-3-292] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

NAVIN SINHA,J. - (1.)The appellants are the legal heirs of the deceased. They were granted compensation of Rs.4,45,420/ with interest at the rate of 12 per cent by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation Act from the date of accident up to the date of deposit in addition to a penalty imposed on the employer under Section 4A(3)(b) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter called "the Act"). The High Court on 09.05.2014 has allowed the appeal of the respondent holding that the death occurred during the course of employment but did not arise out of the employment.
(2.)The deceased was aged 21 years, in the employment of respondent no.2 (since deleted), and was driving her TATA 407 vehicle bearing registration No.UP 15P 1689 on 11.06.2003 from Ambala to Meerut, a distance of approximately 200 Kms. At about 12.30 PM, when he approached the bridge near village Fatehpur, the deceased went to the Yamuna canal to fetch water and also to have a bath. Unfortunately, he slipped into the canal and died. The vehicle was insured with the respondent Insurance Company. P.W.2, who was standing near the bridge, deposed that the deceased had gone to fetch water in a can along with the cleaner who tried to save him, but both slipped into the canal. The Workmen's Compensation Commissioner by order dated 12.12.2005 allowed the claim as aforesaid.
(3.)The High Court in appeal by the Insurance Company held that the deceased may have died during the course of the employment but death did not arise out of the employment, as bathing in the canal was not incidental to the employment but was at the peril of the workman. There was no casual connection between the death of the workman and his employment. He had gone to fetch water for personal consumption and it was not his case that the truck was over heated.
;


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