A non-registered adoption deed cannot establish legal adoption under relevant Acts, affecting dependent status in compensation claims.

1. This appeal has arisen out of order dated 29-6-2010 of the Court of Commissioner, Hazaribagh, in W.C. Case No. 61 of 2007.

2. This appeal was admitted for hearing on following substantial question of law by order dated 18-1-2017 : -

' (A) Whether the adoption deed executed by the deceased on 17-4-2003 before the Notary Public, Hazaribagh, can be treated as valid adoption in terms of provisions of S.16 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act , 1956?

(B) Was the said deed required to be registered as per S.17 of the Indian Registration Act , 1908?

And

(C) Whether the claimants are the dependents as defined under S.2( 1 )(d)(iii)(g) of the Workmen Compensation Act , 1923 (now Employees - Compensation Act, 1923)?'

3. The claimant, i.e. respondent No. 1 had filed the claim application. as one of the dependents of deceased, late Pradip Singh, in the capacity of legal guardian of respondent Nos. 2 and 3, who are alleged to be adopted son and daughter of late Pradip Singh. It is stated that Pradip Singh was employed as Khalasi by respondent No. 4, namely, Rajendra Singh, the owner of Truck No. A438L2483. That on 21-4-2007, the said truck was going to Dehari - On - Sone laden with coal and on the way some unknown criminals kidnapped and killed the driver and khalasi, i.e., the deceased Pradip Singh, for which Mandu P.S. Case No. 164 of 2007 was registered.

The claimants - case is that the deceased was earning Rs. 3,000/- (three thousand) and was also getting daily allowances for food and miscellaneous expenses.

The respondent - owner of the vehicle filed the written statement admitting that the deceased was engaged as a khalasi but he was being paid only Rs. 1,500/- (one thousand five hundred) per month as well as daily allowances. That the Truck was duly insured with the appellant insurer.

4. The appellant insurance company resisted the claim and filed the written statement alleging that the relationship of claimants with the deceased has not been disclosed as there is no recital in the claim application that the minor daughter and son were adopted in accordance to Hindu customary, rites and rituals. It is stated that the claimant / respondent is not a legal heir or dependent of the deceased - Pradip Singh.

5. The claimants have adduced evidence by annexing the affidavit, the fardbeyan, the certificate of registration of the truck, tax tokens, national permit, fitness certificate and death certificate of the deceased.

6. On the basis of materials on record, the Commissioner, Hazaribagh held that the deceased was engaged as khalasi in the said Truck. There was a relationship of employee and employer. The Truck was duly insured with the appellant insurer and the appellant - insurer is liable to pay the compensation amount of Rs. 2,44,502/- (two lakhs forty four thousand five hundred two). It directed the appellant - insurer to deposit the amount by 14-8-2010, failing which they would be liable to pay interest at the rate 12% per annum on the awarded compensation.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant - National Insurance Company Limited has contended that the learned Court of Commissioner, Hazaribagh, has committed manifest error in awarding the compensation without appreciating the fact that adoption deed was not registered in terms of S.17 of the Registration Act, 1908. It is argued that since the said adoption deed was not registered, hence, no presumption could be drawn in terms of S.16 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act , 1956. It