Mere Reproduction Of Evidence Can Never Be Equated With Appreciation: Karnataka High Court Quashes Penalty Against Govt Employee Accused Cannot Repeatedly Send Cheque To FSL Till Favourable Report Is Obtained: Kerala High Court In NI Act Case Succession Certificate Cannot Be Issued For Gold Jewels Pledged With Bank, Applies Only To Debts And Securities: Madras High Court Order 11 Rule 14 CPC | Court Cannot Direct Production Of Documents Without Ascertaining They Are In Party's Possession: Calcutta High Court Undertrial Prisoners Don't Suffer 'Civil Death', Retain Fundamental Right To Alienate Property From Jail: Rajasthan High Court Direction For Reasonable Annual Enhancement Of Maintenance Under Section 125 CrPC Merely Preserves Its Real Value Against Inflation: Delhi High Court Testimony Of Sole Interested Witness Must Be Of 'Sterling Quality' To Base Conviction: Patna High Court Acquits Murder Convict Failure To Communicate Written Grounds Of Arrest Renders Arrest Constitutionally Infirm, Accused Entitled To Bail: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 482 CrPC Petition Not Maintainable Against Order Framing Charge Under SC/ST Act, Appeal Lies Under Section 14A: Tripura High Court Disputed Questions Of Fact Regarding Title And Forged Documents Cannot Be Decided Under Article 226: Telangana High Court Matter To Be Enquired By Bar Council: Madhya Pradesh High Court Dismisses Lawyer's PILs With Costs For Suppressing Attorney-Client Relationship BDA Cannot Arbitrarily Reverse Resolutions Passed To Comply With Judicial Directives: Karnataka High Court Section 52A NDPS Act: Mere Non-Compliance Does Not Automatically Vitiate Trial Unless Evidence Is Doubtful: Punjab & Haryana High Court Seniority Must Be Determined From Date Of Substantive Appointment, Not Ad-Hoc Service: Allahabad High Court Uncorroborated Testimony Of Drug Inspector Cannot Form Sole Basis For Conviction Under Drugs Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Suppression Of Adverse Facts Strikes At Root Of Equitable Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court Denies Injunction In HUF Property Dispute

Notional Extension of Employment Brings Accident During Medical Aid Within Employment Scope: Kerala High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment, the Kerala High Court on 9th April 2024, upheld the principles of notional extension of employment in the case of The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Radhakrishnan & Others. The court dismissed the appeal filed by The Oriental Insurance Company challenging the compensation awarded to a bus conductor who met with an accident while seeking medical aid for a condition experienced during his employment.

Legal Point of Judgment: The primary legal issue revolved around whether the bus conductor’s accident, which occurred while he was on his way to the hospital for a condition experienced during work, fell within the scope of his employment for the purposes of compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923.

Background: The bus conductor, employed by the 2nd respondent and later involving a bus owned by the 3rd respondent, suffered chest pain during his employment and subsequently met with an accident while traveling to the hospital. The Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation awarded him a compensation of Rs.1,13,736/-, which was challenged by the Oriental Insurance Company.

Transfer of Liability: The court referenced Section 157 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, noting that the liability of the insurance policy transfers with the ownership of the vehicle, as established in “Mallamma (Dead) by L.rs. v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. And Others [(2014) 14 SCC 137]”.

Notional Extension of Employment: The court applied the principle of notional extension of employment, asserting that the journey to the hospital for medical aid falls within the scope of employment. This principle was supported by precedents such as “General Manager, B.E.S.T Undertaking, Bombay v. Mrs.Agnes [AIR 1964 SC 193]” and further cases.

Scope of Employment: The court found no impropriety in the Commissioner’s findings that the accident occurred in the course of the claimant’s employment, thereby justifying the compensation.

Decision: The appeal by The Oriental Insurance Company was dismissed, affirming the compensation to the bus conductor.

Date of Decision: 9th April 2024.

“The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Radhakrishnan & Others”,

Latest Legal News