- (1.) HEARD Sri R. C. Gupta, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Usha kiran, the learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 2. The husband of respondent No. 1 died during the course of his employment. A claim application under the Workmen's Compensation Act was filed by the father, mother, brother and sister of the deceased. During the pendency of the claim application, the widow filed an impleadment application praying that she was a necessary party and that she was alone entitled to receive the compensation. The impleadment application was allowed.
(2.) IT has also come on record that the widow, respondent No. 2 had also filed a claim application separately under the Workmen's Compensation Act which was dismissed for want of prosecution. The Commissioner Workmen Compensation after considering the evidence on record gave an award dated 2. 6. 2004 directing the Insurance Company to deposit a sum of Rs. 2,11,790 along with interest @9% per annum and further directed the parties to move an application under section 8 of the workmen's Compensation Act for the apportionment of the aforesaid compensation. Based on the aforesaid award, the Insurance Company has deposited the entire decretal amount. Upon an application filed by the father of the deceased, the Commissioner Workmen Compensation by its order dated 30. 11. 2004 has released the compensation in favour of the widow, respondent No. 2. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, has filed the present writ petition.
(3.) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is the father of the deceased and under the law of inheritance, he is entitled for compensation. Further, the petitioner was also dependent upon the come of the deceased, and was therefore, entitled to receive the compensation. It was also contended that the respondent No. 2 remarried after one year from the date of death of the deceased, and therefore, the respondent No. 2 was no longer entitled to receive any compensation;