Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
UMESH M. ADIGA
National Insurance Co. Ltd., Through Its Regional Office, Rep By Its Manager – Appellant
Versus
Lakshmamma, W/o. Late Srinivas – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(UMESH M. ADIGA, J.)
This appeal is filed by the insurer - respondent No.2, against the Judgment and order passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge and M.A.M.A.C.T, Tarikere, as well as the Commissioner under the Workmens' Compensation Act (for short 'Commissioner'), in ECA No.12/2014.
2. The parties are referred to as per their rankings before the ECA proceedings.
3. Brief facts of the case are that deceased Srinivas was an employee and working as a Supervisor with respondent No.1. On 16.12.2008 around 09.30 a.m. when he was on duty in the Coffee Estate, due to pressure of work, stress and strain he had a severe heart attack; immediately he was taken to hospital, wherein he was declared as brought dead. Deceased died during the course of employment. He was aged about 36 years at the time of his death. He was drawing a salary of Rs.3,000/- per month. Claimants are his wife and children. They filed claim petition under the provisions of Workmens' Compensation Act.
4. Respondent No.1 is employer admitted that deceased Srinivas was working as a Supervisor under Respondent No. 1 and that he was drawing the wages as per the Minimum Wages Act. The death of Srinivas due to heart att
The insurer's liability in a Workmen's Compensation case is dictated by the declared salary in the policy, and penalties for delay must comply with statutory requirements.
It was for claimant to have opted for claim of compensation either under Workmen’s Compensation Act or under Motor Vehicles Act.
The court ruled that the employer must pay timely compensation and could face penalties for delays under the Workmen's Compensation Act.
Employer's liability to pay as per Commissioner's award and the same varied between wages actually drawn by deceased employee and wages shown by employer as payable to employee for purpose of payment....
The insurance company is not liable for interest payments under the Workmen's Compensation Act; liability rests with the employer to pay compensation and associated interest.
The court affirmed that an employee's accidental death during commute can be deemed to arise out of employment under the doctrine of notional extension, impacting liability and compensation assessmen....
The court established that an employee's fatal accident during commute can be deemed to arise out of employment under the notional extension doctrine, warranting compensation based on actual wages.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Insurance Company is primarily liable to pay compensation to the workmen under the Workmen Compensation Act.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
