Raja vs Ajay - 2006 Supreme(MP) 1259

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2006 Supreme(MP) 1259

S.K.KULSHRESTHA, S.K.SETH
Raja – Appellant
Versus
Ajay – Respondent

Advocates:
Ms. Archana Kher for appellant; Sachin Bhatnagar for respondent No.l; Mrs. Preeti Saxena for respondent No.2-Insurer.

ORDER

Kulshrestha, J. -- 1. This case will also govern the disposal of MA No. 3350/2005 as the facts of the two cases are similar and similar question of law is involved.

2. The applicants (appellants) approached the Labour Court under the Workmen's Compensation Act to seek damages on account of the injuries suffered in an accident while they were travelling in a Truck. The appellants' employer examined himself on the basis that he had objected to his being employer of the two appellants. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, finding that the appellant has failed to prove the relationship of employer and the employee, dismissed the claims as not maintainable. It is against this dismissal that the appellant has approached this Court.

3. In view of the finding based on evidence that the appellants were not the employees, we find that they were not entitled to invoke the provisions of Workmen's Compensation Act. The counsel for the respondents have invited attention to section 167 of the Motor Vehicles Act which provides that if a person has an option to approach the Court under the Workmen's Compensation Act as also under the Motor Vehicles Act, it is for him to e