Asking help to provide copy of judgement where compensation is allowed by High court / Supreme court in case of accident during the course of employment. ( an employee while Coming to factory from normal route of residence to Factory, met with road accident i.e. hit by Tractor trolley & remained hospitalised for 45 days, will employee get Temporary disablement amount for the days of accidental absence .
As per WC Act, eligible for Temporary disablement amount for number of days absent. Pls provide supporting documents, for getting benefits from Insurance company, as they are denying for this benefit on pretext that it is not fall under the employment. Pls support with Judgment.
From India, Rewari
1As per WC Act, eligible for Temporary disablement amount for number of days absent. Pls provide supporting documents, for getting benefits from Insurance company, as they are denying for this benefit on pretext that it is not fall under the employment. Pls support with Judgment.
From India, Rewari
Normally when notional extension theory is satisfied, you should get compensation. It is not the insurance company who decides whether to pay or not but the authority to decide such cases is the Workmen Compensation Commission. Therefore, approach the Workmen Compensation Commission and lodge a complaint for the same. Please ensure that time and place of accident should match with the normal time and the route that you travel to come to work.
From India, Kannur
From India, Kannur
In my opinion the theory of notional extension may not be applicable in this case. This is because it depends on the geographical location of your factory and route should be exclusively used to access your factory only.
Hence, your case may not be considered favourably by the WC commissioner. Nevertheless, making a representation to the WC Commissioner will be worth trying.
Regards
MVK
From India, Madras
Hence, your case may not be considered favourably by the WC commissioner. Nevertheless, making a representation to the WC Commissioner will be worth trying.
Regards
MVK
From India, Madras
Notional Extension will apply when the accident takes place in the same route along which the employee travels to the factory and back home and during the same time when he normally travels for work and from work. Therefore, if the spot where the accident has taken place is in the same route, and if the time of accident is within the same time he usually passes through then the notional extension will apply and then compensation as applicable will have to be paid.
From India, Kannur
From India, Kannur
I disagree with Mr. Madhu in this case.
Notional extension doctrine is accepted in ESIC but not under WC act.
There have been cases under it.
The main thing here (it seems from the post, but not clarified), the company has a WC Insurance policy and the insurance denied the claim. The company wants to pay but the insurance refused it.
So, first, someone needs to study the insurance policy and the terms under it. It probably has a specific clause on what constitutes employment injury. If the term is covered, and the insurance company refuses to pay, then the company needs to file a compliant under IRDA, Consumer Protection Act, etc. They can also help the employee file a claim before the Motor Insurance Tribunal for the accident as it involved a motor vehicle and he would be covered under third party liability.
However, the employee was out of duty for only 1 1/2 months. I think the company can pay his salary on humanitarian grounds. I dont think it makes a serious dent in the company's cash flow.
Incidentally, when we renewed our WC policy this year, we paid a premium almost double of our earlier policy because it covered accident and Mediclaim so that such a gap is avoided.
From India, Mumbai
Notional extension doctrine is accepted in ESIC but not under WC act.
There have been cases under it.
The main thing here (it seems from the post, but not clarified), the company has a WC Insurance policy and the insurance denied the claim. The company wants to pay but the insurance refused it.
So, first, someone needs to study the insurance policy and the terms under it. It probably has a specific clause on what constitutes employment injury. If the term is covered, and the insurance company refuses to pay, then the company needs to file a compliant under IRDA, Consumer Protection Act, etc. They can also help the employee file a claim before the Motor Insurance Tribunal for the accident as it involved a motor vehicle and he would be covered under third party liability.
However, the employee was out of duty for only 1 1/2 months. I think the company can pay his salary on humanitarian grounds. I dont think it makes a serious dent in the company's cash flow.
Incidentally, when we renewed our WC policy this year, we paid a premium almost double of our earlier policy because it covered accident and Mediclaim so that such a gap is avoided.
From India, Mumbai
Saswataji please share verdicts which says that notional extension applies only to ESI and not for workmen compensation. In my understanding Workmen (Employees) Compensation Act is the primary legislation concerning accidents during and in connection with employment, and the role of ESIC is only to cover such accidents by collecting premia by way of contributions. ESIC will accept notional extension because it is there under Employees Compensation Act.
From India, Kannur
From India, Kannur
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
Amendment to Payment of Bonus Act 2015.jpg
Online payment of PF mandatory from 1.1.2016.pdf
Security Amount Proof.docx