CASE NAME: Mamta Devi &Ors. v The Reliance General Insurance Company Limited &Anr.

CITATION: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3904 OF 2023 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 10447 of 2019)

BENCH:J.K. Maheshwari, Aravind Kumar

COURT:Supreme Court of India

DECIDED ON:19 May 2023

BRIEF OF FACTS:

1. Mr. Vakil Choudhary (Employee) worked as a truck driver for Respondent No. 2 and was killed in an accident on April 21, 2011.

2. The Appellants (Claimants) are the late Mr Vakil Choudhary's wife, son, and parents, who filed a claim petition with the 'Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum-Commissioner for Workmen Compensation', seeking compensation for his death while on the job.

3. The offending vehicle's insurer, Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd., filed a written statement, but neither the Employer nor the Insurer pursued the matter further. In the absence of any proof of income, the Deputy Labour Commissioner determined the deceased's monthly income to be Rs. 3,900/-, in conformity with the minimum wage rate of Rs. 150 per day.

4. As a result, an Award was made for the Insurer to pay the Appellants a reduced sum of Rs. 4,31,671/- plus 6% p.a. interest. The Appellants took the Award to the High Court. The Award was overturned by the High Court on the grounds that the disagreement was a contested case and was coram-non-judice.

4. It was decided that the Appellants should take their complaints to the jurisdictional Labour Court. In accordance with Sections 20(1) and 20(2) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, the appropriate Government issued a notification entrusting the adjudication of all contested claims arising under the Act, 1923 to the presiding officers of the Labour Court.

5. The Appellants challenged the High Court’s order before the Supreme Court

ISSUE RAISED:The Compensation for a Deceased Workmanand the wife’s claim.

ARGUMENTS PRESENTED:

The conclusion that we must reach is that the wife of the deceased, who testified that her husband earned Rs.6,000/- per month, deserves to be taken as gospel truth. We find no reason to doubt her statement.

HELD:The Supreme Court has awarded an enhanced compensation under the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923 to the kin of a deceased employee, wherein holding that the objective of the Act, 1923 is dispensation of social justice.The court held that when the wife of the deceased employee deposed his income on oath and the Employer admitted the same, thus, then by no stretch of imagination the Deputy Labour Commissioner could have awarded lower compensation on minimum wage rate.

Accordingly, the Appeal stands disposed of.