MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |     Dowry Death | Presumption Under Section 113-B Not Applicable as No Proof of Cruelty Soon Before Death : Supreme Court    |     Land Acquisition | Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. (JAL) Liable for Compensation under Supplementary Award, Not Ultra-Tech Cement Ltd.: Supreme Court    |     Non-Mentioning of Bail Orders in Detention Reflects Clear Non-Application of Mind: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order    |     Conviction Under Arms Act and Criminal Conspiracy Quashed Due to Non-Seizure of Key Evidence and Failure to Prove Ownership of Box: Jharkhand High Court    |    

"Supreme Court Reinstates Compensation Award, Says 'Death Had Causal Connection to Employment'"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of India reinstated the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner's award of ₹3,26,140 with 12% p.a. interest to the legal heirs of Sumer Singh, a driver who died while on duty. The Court set aside the High Court's reversal of the award, stating that the "death had a causal connection to employment."

The bench, comprising Justices HIMA KOHLI and RAJESH BINDAL, delivered the judgment on August 23, 2023. The case revolved around the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923, and questioned whether the death of an employee while on duty could be considered as arising out of employment.

The legal representatives of the deceased had filed an appeal against the High Court's decision, which had overturned the Commissioner's award. The Supreme Court found merit in the appeal and stated, "there is every reason to assume that long spells of driving was a material contributory factor, if not the sole cause that accelerated his unexpected death at a young age."

The Court also rejected the argument of the Insurance Company, which contended that the death did not arise out of employment. The Court noted that an "additional premium was paid to cover such eventualities under the 1923 Act."

The judgment cited previous cases like Param Pal Singh Through Father v. National Insurance Co. & Anr., and Northeast Karnataka Road Transport Corporation. v. Sujatha, to support its decision.

The ruling is seen as a significant step in clarifying the scope of the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923, particularly in cases involving the death of employees while on duty.

Date of Decision: August 23, 2023

Smt. Dariyao Kanwar & ors. vs M/s  United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & anr.

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/23-Aug-2023_Dariyao_Kanwar_Vs_United_india_Insurance.pdf"]

Similar News