Release of Co-Sureties’ Properties Bars Revival in Debt Recovery Proceedings: Karnataka High Court Rajasthan High Court Permits Summoning of Tower Location Records of Police Officials in Corruption Case ISF's Public Meeting | Freedom of Speech and Assembly Is Fundamental but Subject to Reasonable Restrictions: Calcutta High Court Single Blow Aimed at a Vital Part With Dangerous Weapon Constitutes Murder Under Section 302 IPC: Kerala High Court Orissa High Court Quashes FIR Against Law Students Over Ragging Incident Pre-Trial Detention Cannot Be Punitive; Bail is the Rule, Jail the Exception: Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Accused in ₹3.06 Crore Forgery Case Collector's Actions in No Confidence Motion Held Illegal; Cost Imposed on State for Abdication of Statutory Duties: Allahabad High Court Judiciary as Guardian of the Constitution Must Address Failures in Law Enforcement: P&H High Court Demands Action Plan on 79,000 FIRs Pending Beyond Statutory Period NDPS | Presence of Contraband in Taxi Alone Is Not Proof of Guilt: Supreme Court Auction Purchaser’s Title Cannot Be Defeated by Unregistered Documents or Unsubstantiated Claims: Supreme Court Overturns High Court Order Land Acquisition | Section 28A Application Maintainable Based on Appellate Court’s Enhanced Compensation: Allahabad High Court Supreme Court Dissolves Marriage Using Article 142: ₹25 Lakh Settlement Ends All Pending Cases Common Intention Requires No Prior Planning; May Arise During the Incident: Supreme Court TESTIMONY OF PROSECUTRIX MUST "INSPIRE CONFIDENCE": SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS ACQUITTAL IN RAPE CASE

Supreme Court Dismisses Compensation Claim for Failure to Establish Employer-Employee Relationship and Delay in Filing

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India dismissed a compensation claim filed under the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923, citing the failure to establish a valid employer-employee relationship and significant delay in filing the application. The judgment was delivered by Justice Rajesh Bindal on July 4, 2023.

The case pertained to the tragic death of Machindra Ananda Jagtap, who lost his life in a road accident on August 17, 1993, while driving a jeep owned by Jayram Ganpati Jagtap. Shantabai Ananda Jagtap and another individual, the legal heirs of the deceased, sought compensation based on the assertion that the accident occurred during the course of his employment.

However, the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation at Sangli, Maharashtra, had rejected the initial claim on the grounds of both delay and lack of merits. The Commissioner also deemed the claim not maintainable under Section 167 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Subsequently, the High Court of Judicature of Bombay upheld the Commissioner's decision on the issue of delay but found the claim to be maintainable.

The Supreme Court carefully examined the evidence and arguments presented in the case. It noted that the claimants had failed to establish a master and servant relationship between the deceased and the vehicle owner, Jayram Ganpati Jagtap. The Court observed that the evidence provided, including the admission by the claimant that the vehicle owner was her husband's brother, did not prove the existence of an employer-employee relationship.

Furthermore, the Court highlighted the claimants' intent to claim compensation from the offending vehicle rather than the vehicle owner. In an earlier proceeding before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, they had chosen not to claim compensation against the owner or the vehicle's insurance company. This conduct suggested that they had deliberately avoided making a claim against the employer.

Regarding the issue of delay, the Court emphasized that the claimants were aware of their option to claim compensation under the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923, from the beginning. However, they had only filed the application before the Commissioner after the proceedings in the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal concluded in 2003, and they were unable to execute the award. The Court concluded that there was no sufficient cause to condone the significant delay of approximately 9 years in filing the application.

Supreme Court held that the claimants were not entitled to any compensation as they had failed to establish the employer-employee relationship and the delay in filing the application was fatal to their claim. The appeal was dismissed, and no costs were awarded.

Date of Decision: July 4, 2023

Shantabai Ananda Jagtap  & anr.      vs Jayram Ganpati Jagtap & anr.     

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/4-Jul-2023-SHANTABAI-ANANDA-VS-JAYRAM.pdf"]         

Similar News