IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
(O&M)BALJINDER KAUR – Appellant
Versus
E.S.I. CORPORATION – Respondent
##PAGE1##
FAO No.937 of 1998 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Reserved on 27th of November, 2025
Pronounced on 23rdof December, 2025
Uploaded on 23rd of December, 2025
Whether only operative part of the judgment is pronounced? No
Whether full judgment is pronounced? Yes
FAO No.937 of 1998 (O&M)
Baljinder Kaur ....Appellant
Versus
ESI Corporation and another .....Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN
Present : Mr. A.P. Bhandari, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. H.S. Bhatia, Advocate for the respondents.
PANKAJ JAIN, J.
Present appeal is directed against the order dated 07.03.1998
passed by ESI Court whereby appeal preferred by the claimant under Section
75(2) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as
'the 1948 Act') has been dismissed rejecting the claim of the appellant.
2. The issue involved in the present appeal is :
“Whether deceased Gurcharan Singh, who was employed as
Kitchen Runner and Dish Washer with M/s Floating Restaurant,
died in an accident arising out of and during the course of
employment or not?
DEEPAK KUMAR
2025.12.23 15:24
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
##PAGE2##FAO No.937 of 1998 (O&M) 2
3. Gurcharan Singh used to commute from his residence to his
place of employment by cycle covering 7 Kilometes daily. As per the
claimant, on 18.10.1993 at about 2:30 PM while Gurcharan Singh was
returning home after finishing his job riding his cycle along with Amrik
Singh, he suddenly fell down and became unconscious. He was taken to
Civil Hospital, Fatehgarh Sahib where he died at around 7:55 PM. As per
the doctors, he died of 'myocardial vessel'. It is admitted that the deceased
was an employee insured with ESI Corporation. His case was reported to
the Corporation and claim was raised on the ground that deceased died in an
accident arising out of and during the course of employment.
4. The claim was rejected by the Corporation vide communication
dated 03.02.1994.
5. Statutory appeal was preferred.
6. The same also stands rejected.
7. The appellant challenged the order passed by Director General,
ESIC, dated 23.12.1994 preferring present petition under Section 75(2) of
the 1948 Act.
8. The ESIC Court framed the following issues:
“1. Whether the deceased Gurcharan Singh died as a result of
injuries suffered during the course of employement with
M/s Floating Restaurant, GT Road, Sirhind? OPP.
2. Whether the applicant is a dependent of the deceased and is
entitled to all the dependent's benefits? OPP.
DEEPAK KUMAR
2025.12.23 15:24
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
##PAGE3##FAO No.937 of 1998 (O&M) 3
3. Relief.”
9. While deciding Issues against the appellant/claimant, the Court
observed as under:
“In this case, there is no evidence on the file which may show that
the death of Gurcharan Singh has got a casual connection with his
employment and that the death took place in the course of
employment.
11. In view of the judgment of the Apex Court, I hold that the
death of Gurcharan Singh did not take place in the Course of
employment and therefore, he is not entitled to any benefit. The
respondents have rightly passed the order copy Ex. P.5/1 rejecting
the claim of the petitioner and hence issue no.1 and 2 are decided
against the petitioner.
10. The ESI Court relied upon observations made by Supreme
Court in the case of The Regional Director, E.S.I. Corporation and
another vs. Francis De Costa & Anr. JT 1996(8) S.C. 118
11. Counsel for the appellant has assailed the findings recorded by
the ESI Court, to submit that the claim of the appellant has been wrongly
rejected. He submits that evidence has come on record that the health of the
deceased deteriorated while he was performing his duties at the place of
employment. The deceased sought short leave which was declined by the
manager. There is no past history that the deceased was suffering from any
heart ailment. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the claim made by
the appellant should have been allowed. He places reliance upon Sectio
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.