1

8-14205-2019ca

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

8 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.14205 OF 2019

IN FAST/19774/2019

PREMLATA @ PREMKALA NAMDEO SARGE AND ORS

VERSUS

BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., THR ITS BRANCH

MANAGER AND ORS

Mr F.K. Fayaz, Advocate for applicants

Mr S.S. Dargad, Advocate h/f Mr S.G. Chapalgaonkar, Advocate for respondent

no.1

CORAM : SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.

DATE : 25^th April, 2022

PER COURT :

1.

It is pointed out by Mr F.K. Fayaz, learned Advocate for applicants that

name of respondent no.1 stated in the application is the same as reflected in

First Appeal on stamp number and objection may be waived. Perused the Civil

Application and Appeal on stamp number and found that the name of

respondent No.1 shown in Civil Application is the same as shown in First

Appeal. As such, office objection does not survive. The application to proceed

further.

2.

It is an application for withdrawal of amount moved by the

applicants/original claimants.

3.

Heard Mr F.K. Fayaz, learned Advocate for applicants/claimants and Mr

S.S. Dargad holding for Mr S.G. Chapalgaonkar, learned Advocate for

respondent No.1/Insurance Company.

4.

Mr F.K. Fayaz, learned Advocate for applicants/original claimants invited

my attention to the impugned judgment and pointed out that the deceased

was in the employment of respondent No.2 and he died during the course of

2

8-14205-2019ca

the employment of respondent No.2 because of severe heart attack. The

learned Commissioner has considered all the facts and evidence on record and

held that in view of terms of Insurance policy, the Insurance Company is liable to

pay the compensation. The learned Advocate for the applicants/original

claimants urged to allow the claimants to withdraw the amount of compensation.

5.

Mr S.S. Dargad learned Advocate for respondent no.1 strongly opposed

to allow this application. He is disputing that the death of employee has

occurred during the course of employment. He submitted that it is a natural

death due to heart attack. It has no nexus with the employment. The learned

Commissioner and Judge, Labour Court, Latur has also awarded interest which

is not covered by the Insurance policy.

6.

I have considered the submissions of both the sides. Perused the

impugned judgment passed by the Labour Court, Latur. On going through the

same, it is revealed that after appreciating the rival pleadings and after going

through the record, the learned Commissioner and Judge, Labour Court, Latur

has observed that the deceased was in the employment of Latur Integrate

Textiles Park Ltd. and accident occurred during the course of employment. Mr

Dargad, learned Advocate for Insurance Company submitted that the concerned

Doctor is not examined in order to prove the cause of death. That aspect would

be taken into consideration at the time of final hearing. As on today, I cannot

overlook the finding given by the Commissioner that the deceased died during

the course of employment due to severe heart attack. Having considered the

submissions of both the sides, I am convinced to allow the applicants/original

claimants to withdraw 50% of the amount of compensation.

3

8-14205-2019ca

ORDER

(i)

The application is hereby allowed.

(ii)

The Commissioner for Employees' Compensation &

Judge, Labour Court, Latur is directed to make payment of

compensation of 50% to the applicants/original claimants with

accrued interest thereon on furnishing usual undertaking.

(iii)

Civil Application is accordingly disposed of.

( SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.)

vvr