The appellants were entitled to compensation for the employee's death as relationship with the employer was established, and the claim was not barred by limitation due to timing of civil death declaration.

JUDGMENT :

Ravindra Maithani, J.

Present appeal is preferred under Section 30 of The Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923 (“the Act”) against the judgment and order dated 21.08.2025, passed by Employees’ Compensation Commissioner/Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rudraprayag, in Employee Compensation Case No.01 of 2025, Manju Devi and others Vs. National Insurance Company Limited and another (“the case”), by which, the application seeking compensation under Section 22 of the Act filed by the appellants has been dismissed.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. Briefly stated, the appellants filed an application under Section 22 of the Act seeking compensation on the death of Suresh Lal, who was husband of appellant no.1 and father of remaining appellants. According to the claim petition, the deceased was 28 years of age and was a driver in the vehicle registration No.UK13TA 0685 (“the vehicle”) owned by the respondent no.2/Surat Singh Bhandari. The deceased was the employee of the respondent no.2/Surat Singh Bhandari. On 07.07.2017, at 11:00 a.m., when the vehicle was proceeding towards Rudraprayag, it met with an accident and fell into a deep gorge, due to which, some of the passengers spilled out from the vehicle and some of the passengers immersed in the river along with the vehicle. The deceased Suresh Lal was one of them, who was never traced. The claim petition records that the deceased was getting Rs.15,000/- per month salary. Based on these facts Rs. 30,00,000/- compensation was sought.

4. The respondent no.2, the owner of the vehicle filed objections to the claim petition. He admits most of the averments made in the application filed by the appellants for claiming compensation, but according to the respondent no.2/the owner of the vehicle, the deceased Suresh Lal was being paid Rs.8,000/- per month salary.

5. The respondent no.1/National Insurance Company Limited (“insurance company”) has also filed its objection in the claim petition. The monthly salary and factor of employment, as stated in para 5 and 9 of their application by the appellants has been denied by the insurance company. It has been the case of the insurance company that the alleged incident was not an accident as has been envisaged/defined under the Act. There is no casual connection between the accident and employee; hence appellants are not entitled for any compensation.

6. Based on the averments made by the parties in the case, six issues were framed, which are as follows:-

i. Whether on 07.07.2017 at about 11:00 in the morning, at Jawadi bye-pass near forest department vehicle registration No. UK13TA 0685 went out of control and fell into the river and some of the passengers spilled out from the vehicle and some of the passengers immersed in the river along with the vehicle including the deceased?

ii. Whether on 07.07.2017 at about 11:00 a.m. at Jawadi bye-pass near forest department vehicle bearing registration No. UK13TA 0685 went out of control and fell into the river, thereafter the deceased Suresh Lal was not traceable for about 07 years after the incident and thereafter the court of Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) Rudraprayag presumed his civil death?

iii. Whether on 07.07.2017 on the death of the deceased Suresh Lal [the presumption made by the court of Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) Rudraprayag], was under the employment of the respondent no.2/Surat Singh Bhandari as a driver in vehicle registration No. UK13TA 0685 and was getting sala