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

2026 Supreme(Online)(All) 96117

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
Subhash Vidyarthi, J
Vansh Nigam and another – Appellant
Versus
Workmens Compensation CommissionerCollector Lakhimpur Kheri and 3 others – Respondent
WRIT - C No. - 12432 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Deo Raj Singh
For the Respondents: C.S.C., Aprajita Bansal, Neerav Chitravanshi

The Limitation Act, 1963, applies to the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991, because the Collector functions as a Civil Court. Consequently, the limitation period for minor claimants is extended until the cessation of their legal disability under Sections 6 and 8 of the Limitation Act.

Headnote:The case involves the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991, and the Limitation Act, 1963. The petitioners, who were minors at the time of their father's death due to electrocution, filed a claim for relief under Section 6 of the Public Liability Insurance Act after attaining majority. The Collector rejected the claim as time-barred under Section 6(3) of the Act, which prescribes a five-year limitation period. The court noted that the Collector failed to perform the statutory duty of publishing the accident to invite claims under Section 5. The primary issue is whether the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963, specifically those regarding legal disability of minors, apply to proceedings under the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991. The court reasoned that since the Collector is vested with the powers of a Civil Court under Section 7(5) of the Act and Rule 5(ii)(h) of the Public Liability Insurance Rules, 1991, and the Act does not expressly exclude the Limitation Act, Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act applies. The court emphasized that as a beneficial legislation, the Act must be interpreted to ensure that minor children are not denied benefits due to legal disability. the writ petition is allowed

Table of Content
1. background of the claim for relief and its rejection by the collector as time-barred. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. arguments regarding the applicability of the limitation act and condonation of delay. (Para 7 , 8)
3. analysis of the statutory duties of the collector and the framework of the public liability insurance act. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. determination that the collector functions as a court, making the limitation act applicable. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
5. application of legal disability rules to extend limitation for minor claimants. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
6. quashing of the impugned order and remand for fresh adjudication on merits. (Para 24)

RESERVED / A.F.R.

1. Heard Sri Deo Raj Singh, Advocate, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Aparajita Bansal, Advocate, the learned counsel for the opposite parties.

2. The instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners namely (i) Vansh Nigam, aged about 19 years, S/o Late Indresh Kumar and (ii) Khushi Nigam, aged about 17 years, minor daughter of Late Indresh Kumar, through her brother and guardian Vansh Nigam, aged about 19 years, challenging the validity of an order dated 05.06.2025 passed by the Collector, Lakhimpur Kheri, in Case No. 673 of 2024 under Section 6 of the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 rejecting the petitioners’ claim under Section 6 of the Public Liability Insurance Act 1991.

3. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the petitioners’ father, Indresh Kumar expired on 28.04.2015 due to electrocution while he was merely 30 years of age. He used to run a beetle shop cum provision store and also used to do cultivation. His income was Rs.20,000/- per month and he was the sole earning member of his family. At the time death of their father, the petitioners were aged 9 years and 7 years respectively.

4. When the petitioner no. 1 attained majority and the petitioner no. 2 was still a minor aged 16 years, they filed an application under Section 6 (3) of the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 before the Prescribed Authority / Collector, Kheri for claiming compensation under the aforesaid Act. The opposite parties filed a written statement stating that no claim under Section 6(3) of the aforesaid Act can be filed after the expiry of 5 years since the date of the accident and, therefore, the suit is time-barred.

5. Upon this, the petitioners filed an application under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 stating that they had filed a Miscellaneous Case No. 3 of 2016, under Order XXXIII, Rule 1 CPC for permission to file a suit in forma pauperis. That suit was dismissed in default on 25.11.2023. After the petitioner no.1 attained majority, he has filed the application under Section 6(3) of the Public Liability Insurance Act without any further delay.

6. The Prescribed Authority / Collector has rejected the application by the impugned order dated 05.06.2025 holding that an application under Section 6(3) of the Public Liability Insurance Act can be entertained only within a period of 5 years since the date of the accident. The application under Section 14 of the Limitation Act has been filed belatedly, and therefore, the same cannot be allowed.

7. Challenging the validity of the aforesaid order, the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Laxmi Engineering Works Vs. P.S.G. Industrial Institute : (1995) 3 SCC 583 and M/s Consolidated Engg. Enterprises Vs. Principal Secy. Irrigation Deptt. and others : 2008 (7) SCC 169, which are on the point of applicability of Section 14 of the Limitation Act.

8. Per contra, Ms. Aprajita Bansal, the learned counsel for the opposite party has submitted that Section 6(3) of the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 permits entertaining applications under Section 6(1) within a period of five years from the date

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 Back to top