Case Note & Summary
The case involves two appeals filed by M/s. Krishnagangaa Consultants, a contractor, against the order of the Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (Labour Court, Chandrapur) awarding compensation to the legal representatives of two deceased employees who died in the same accident. The appellant had undertaken a contract from Western Coalfields Ltd. (respondent no.2) and employed the deceased workers. The Labour Court held the appellant liable as employer and directed payment of compensation. The appellant challenged the order, contending that the insurance company should be liable. The High Court, after hearing the parties, dismissed the appeals, affirming that the appellant was the employer and liable under the Act. The court also directed the insurance company to pay the compensation to the claimants and recover the same from the appellant, as the insurance policy was not valid due to non-payment of premium. The judgment was delivered by Justice Z.A. Haq on 9th January 2015.
Headnote
A) Workmen's Compensation - Employer-Employee Relationship - Liability of Contractor - The appellant, a contractor, had undertaken job on contract basis from respondent no.2 and employed the deceased workers. The court held that the appellant was the employer and liable to pay compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 for the death of employees in an accident. The insurance company was also held liable to indemnify the appellant. (Paras 1-2)
B) Workmen's Compensation - Insurance - Indemnity - The court directed the insurance company to pay the compensation amount to the claimants and recover the same from the appellant, as the appellant had not paid the premium and the insurance policy was not valid. (Para 2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant (contractor) is liable to pay compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 for the death of employees engaged by him, and whether the insurance company is liable to indemnify.
Final Decision
Both appeals are dismissed. The insurance company is directed to pay the compensation amount to the claimants and recover the same from the appellant.
Law Points
- Employer-employee relationship
- Workmen's Compensation Act
- 1923
- vicarious liability
- contractor liability
- insurance coverage
Case Details
2015 LawText (BOM) (01) 136
First Appeal No.248/2005 and First Appeal No.249/2005
Shri V.S. Kukday for appellant; Shri R.K. Maheshwari h/f Shri A. Parchure, Senior Advocate for respondents 3 & 4 (in FA 248/2005) and respondents 3 to 5 (in FA 249/2005); Shri D.N. Kukday for respondent no.7 (in FA 248/2005) and respondent no.8 (in FA 249/2005)
M/s. Krishnagangaa Consultants, through its Proprietor, Shri Gajender C. Sunder
Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act and Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Chandrapur; General Manager, Western Coalfields Ltd.; Dynaneshwar Asaram Khobragade; Pushpa Dyananeshwar khobragade; Kailash Dynaneshwar Khobragade; Siddarth Dynaneshwar Khobragae; Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. (in FA 248/2005) and similar parties in FA 249/2005
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Appeals against order of Commissioner under Workmen's Compensation Act awarding compensation to legal representatives of deceased employees.
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought to set aside the order of the Labour Court and contended that the insurance company should be liable to pay compensation.
Filing Reason
The appellant challenged the Labour Court's order holding him liable as employer for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.
Previous Decisions
The Labour Court (Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act) had awarded compensation to the claimants, holding the appellant liable.
Issues
Whether the appellant is liable as employer under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 for the death of employees engaged by him.
Whether the insurance company is liable to indemnify the appellant.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that the insurance company should be liable to pay compensation.
Respondents (claimants) supported the Labour Court's order holding the appellant liable.
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant, being the employer of the deceased workers, is liable to pay compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. The insurance company, though not liable due to invalid policy, is directed to pay and recover from the appellant to ensure justice to the claimants.
Judgment Excerpts
It is undisputed that the appellant had undertaken the job on contract basis from the respondent no.2. It is undisputed that the deceased employees were employed by the appellant.
These appeals can be disposed of by the common judgment as the same issues are involved.
Procedural History
The proceedings under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 were filed by the legal representatives of two deceased employees. The Labour Court awarded compensation. The appellant filed two appeals before the High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923:
