SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Ker) 416

J.B.KOSHY, K.R.UDAYABHANU
Shah – Appellant
Versus
Rajankutty – Respondent


Judgment :-

Koshy, J.

Appellant employer challenges the order of the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation on four grounds. A loading and unloading worker during the course of employment, while carrying a head load, collapsed, fell down and died due to heart attack. According to the appellant, in his written statements, the worker fell down while he was carrying the load due to his carelessness. Tribunal ordered compensation holding that the accident occurred during the course of employment and death is arising out of employment. Mere negligence or even gross negligence does not disentitle a workmen for compensation. As held by the Madras High Court in Sundaresa Mudaliar v. Muthummal (1956 (2) LLJ 52), doctrine of contributory negligence has no place in workmen’s compensation claim. Proviso (b) to Section 3(1) of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (in short ‘the Act’) clearly provides as follows:

“3. Employer’s liability for compensation. – (1) If personal injury is caused to a workman by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment, his employer shall be liable to pay compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter:

Provided that the employer shall n























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top