IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 29.08.2025 FAO-5155-2025 (O&M)

M/s. Venus Co. Pvt. Ltd. ....Appellant Versus Sita Ram Das and others ...Respondents FAO-5163-2025 (O&M)

Ms. Venus Co. Pvt. Ltd. ....Appellant Versus Kusum and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present : Mr. Mohak Bhandana, Advocate for the appellants.

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL)

CM-17229-CII-2025 in FAO-5155-2025 CM-17283-CII-2025 in FAO-5163-2025 Instant applications have been filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 seeking condonation of delay of 21 days in filing the appeals.

For the reasons recorded in the applications, this Court is satisfied that the applicant/appellant has made out a sufficient cause for condonation of delay.

Consequently, the present applications are allowed. The delay of 21 days in filing the instant appeals is hereby condoned.

FAO-5155-2025 FAO-5163-2025 Instant two appeals are directed against the order passed by the Commissioner under the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1923 Act’).

2. Since both the appeals arise out of the same accident and involve common question of law in the background of same facts, both are being decided by a common judgment.

3. The employer is in appeal. Commissioner under the Employee’s Compensation Act, allowed the claim petition filed by an injured/employee Sita Ram Das and that filed by Kusum and others, dependents of deceased/employee Pawan Kukreja.

4. As per the claimants, on 06.11.2019 at about 2.00 PM, Sita Ram Das along with Pawan Kukreja were called and hired by the employer, i.e. the appellant M/s. Venus Company Private Limited for loading and unloading of the goods from vehicle bearing No.HR-55-S-3065, Eicher Canter. As per claimants, Pawan Kukreja and Sita Ram Das were working as helper/labourer for different companies including M/s. Kay Bee Engineers. Both of them were being hired by company for sporadic work of loading and unloading material. On the fateful day, on the asking of driver of the truck from which goods were to be loaded, Pawan Kukreja and Sita Ram Das opened the gate of the truck. It came in contact with high-tension electric wires thereby electrocuting both of them. It led to death of Pawan Kukreja. Sita Ram Das sustained serious injuries. He was rendered permanently disabled to the extent of 70%. Claimants accordingly, approached the Commissioner seeking compensation under the Employee’s Compensation Act.

5. The claim petition was contested by the respondents. Appellant, who was arraigned as respondent No.1, denied employer- employee relationship. Respondent No.1 claimed that the injured as well as the deceased were sent to B.K. Hospital by respondent No.1 on humanitarian grounds as the incident happened outside the factory premises of respondent No.1.

6. Claim petitions were put to trial by Commissioner, framing following issues :

“1. Whether there is relationship of employee & employer between the applicant and respondent nos.1 & 2.

2. Whether the accident took place during the course of employment of respondent No.1 & 2?

3. Whether the application is not maintainable?

4. Relief.”

7. Holding the deceased as well as the victim, employees of respondent No.1, the Commissioner allowed the claim petitions. An amount of Rs.7,39,441/- along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of accident till its actual realization has been awarded in the case of Sita Ram Das the injured/victim, and compensation of Rs.8,30,975/- along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its actual realization has been awarded to the dependents of the deceased Pawan Kukreja.

8. Counsel for the appellant has assailed the findings recorded by the Commissioner. He refers to the testimony of claimant Sita Ram Das to submit that he admitted of being employee of M/s. K.B. Engineering, Sector 23, Sanjay Colony, Faridabad, yet has been wrongly held to be an employee of appellant M/s. Venus C