Master mariner treated as seaman for recovery remedies; participation without jurisdiction objection estops later challenge; writ court refuses interference absent pleaded jurisdictional error and to prevent liability avoidance.

JUDGMENT :

SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

1) This is a tragic case where the daughter of a deceased Captain, who lost his wife during the course of his employment, is awaiting death compensation for the last 14 long years. The case involves death of both the parents where the mother has passed away in 2008 due to cancer and her father passed away during the course of his employment on 13 November 2012 after serving for 23 long years leaving behind two children. Petitioner, who is directed to pay the compensation to the daughter of the Late Captain, questions the correctness of the order dated 28 July 2017 passed by the first Appellate Authority directing it to pay compensation to Respondent No.3 as per the terms of the contract executed with her father.

2) The Petitioner is a private limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. At the relevant time, it was registered under the Merchant Shipping (Recruitment and Placement Services) Rules, 2005 as a provider of recruitment and placement services in relation to employment on board foreign ships. The case relates to death compensation claim in respect of late Captain Baldev Singh Dhinsa (Captain Dhinsa). The claim was preferred by his daughter/Respondent No.3. According to Respondent No.3, her father-late Captain Dhinsa was employed with M/s. Teekay Shipping as Master since the year 1990 and continued to function as such till November-2012. He was assigned to work on the vessel-Orkney Spirit vide appointment dated 29 May 2012. After completing the appointment on the vessel-Orkney Spirit, Captain Dhinsa proceeded on leave from 3 October 2012. While being on earned leave, he was diagnosed with Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) and passed away on 13 November 2012. His wife had already pre- deceased him on 29 June 2008. Captain Dhinsa left behind him daughter (Respondent No.3) and son. Respondent No.3 approached the Petitioner-Company for claiming her father’s balance dues and also submitted a claim for death compensation in terms of his employment dated 29 May 2012. Other dues of Captain Dhinsa were settled by the Petitioner. However, death compensation claim of USD 2,46,780/- was not cleared by the Petitioner. Respondent No.3 received an email denying liability in respect of death compensation claim. Respondent No.3 accordingly approached Director General of Shipping (DG) vide letter dated 26 July 2013. The complaint of Respondent No.3 was forwarded to the Petitioner, who submitted reply dated 3 December 2013 contending inter-alia that there is no provision in the contract for death compensation claim when death occurs while on leave. The office of Shipping Master called upon the Petitioner to submit various documents vide letter dated 1 February 2014. The Petitioner submitted the same on 17 February 2014. The DG fixed the date for enquiry vide letter dated 10 June 2014. It appears that during the course of hearing, case of Captain Vivek Kuthiala was cited in support of case of Respondent No. 3, who was paid compensation by Petitioner when he was yet to join after expiry of period of leave. The Petitioner and Respondent No.3 attended the hearing on 1 July 2014. The Petitioner submitted letter dated 10 September 2014 once again raising