Page 127 - DCOM207_LABOUR_LAWS

Labour Laws

Notes granted to them, in view of my earlier finding on issue No.3 in all the petitions, but all the
same these petitions have got to be dismissed on account of the fact that neither the first
respondent nor the second respondent is liable to pay compensation amount to any other
petitioners herein.”
The appellants took the matter in appeal but the High Court in its brief order did not at all
advert to this aspect of the matter.
Coming back to the order passed by the Tribunal, we are completely unable to appreciate
the reasons assigned for denying the appellants the ‘no fault compensation’ as provided
under section 140 of the Act. The Tribunal was gravely in error in taking the view that a
claim for compensation under section 140 of the Act can succeed only in case it is raised at
the initial stage of the proceedings and further that the claim must fail if the accident had
taken place by using the car without the consent or knowledge of its owner. Section 140 is
the first section of chapter X of the Act. It is a small chapter consisting of only five sections
(from 140 to 144) and has the marginal heading “Liability without Fault in Certain Cases”.
Section 140 reads as under:
In light of the discussions made above, we are unhesitatingly of the view, that the Tribunal
was completely wrong in denying to the appellant, the compensation in terms of section
140 of the Act. We find and hold that the appellant (as well as the other 3 claimants) were
fully entitled to no fault compensation under section 140 of the Act. We, accordingly, direct
the insurance company to pay to the appellant ` 25,000/- along with simple interest @
6% p.a. from the date of the order of the Tribunal till the date of payment. The other 3
claimants are not before this Court, but that is presumably because they are too poor to
come to this Court. Since, we have allowed the claim of the appellants, there is no reason
why this order should not be extended to the other 3 claimants as well. We, accordingly,
do so. The insurance company is directed to make the payment as directed in this judgment
within 3 months.
In the result, the appeal is allowed but with no order as to costs.
Question

Critically analyse the above case.
Source: http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/judiciary/Workmen-s-Compensation-Act-1923-1977.asp#.UVVaIjflRMg

7.5 Summary

l z The Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 is one of the earliest labor welfare and social
security legislation enacted in India.

l z It recognizes the fact that if a workman is a victim of accident or an occupational disease in
course of his employment, he needs to be compensated.
l z The Act does not apply to those workers who are insured under the Employees’ State
Insurance Act 1948.
l z The Act does not apply to members serving in the Armed Forces of the Indian Union, and
employees covered under the provisions of the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 as
disablement and dependants’ benefit are available under this Act.

l z Section 53 of the Employees’ State Insurance Act provides:
An insured person or his dependents shall not be entitled to receive or recover whether
from the employer of the insured person or from any other person any compensation or
damages under the Workmen’s Compensation act 1923 or any other law for the time being
in force or otherwise in respect of an employment injury sustained by the insured person
as an employee under this Act.

122 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY