A X WORKER WORKING IN Y COMPANY BECOMES DEATH ON ROAD ACCIDENT DUE TO HIS MOTOR BIKE COLLIDE WITH A TRUCK WHILE HE WAS COMING FROM MARKET (TO PURCHASE VEGETABLES) TO HIS RESIDENCE AT 2230 HRS.
REPORT TO POLICE STATION, FIR DONE, POSTMORTEM DONE, ARRANGE TO SEND HIS BODY TO HIS NATIVE ALONG WITH FUNERAL EXPENSES Rs. 25000/- AND HANDOVER HIS DEAD BODY TO HIS DEPENDENT.
FURTHER ALSO ARRANGE TO PAID TO HIS DEPENDENT HIS DUES WITH Y COMPANY.
THEN AFTER FEW MONTH X SEND A LEGAL NOTICE REGARDING TO PAY HIS COMPENSATION BUT WE "Y" REPLIED HIM YOUR DEATH IS NOT COVERED UNDER WC ACT BECAUSE YOUR ACCIDENT HAPPENED AT ROAD DURING PERSONNEL WORK. FOR YOUR INFORMATION WE "Y" COVERED UNDER WC POLICY.
DEPENDENT OF "X" CLAIM AT HIS LOCAL JAN ADDALAT COURT, DURING TWO AND HALF YEAR SO MANY HEARING HAPPENED AT JAN LOK ADDALATE AND HE AWARD TO PAY Rs. 160000/- TO THE DEPENDENT OF DECEASED BUT THE "Y" COMPANY NOT OBEY THE SAME.
DEPENDENT OF "X" CLAIM AT THE COURT OF WC COMMISSIONER AND THE COMMISSIONER AWARDED TO PAY Rs. 10,75,000/- COMPENSATION AS PER THE RULE ALONG WITH THE ENTREST OF THE GAPE PERIOD IN CASE OF DIS OBEY 50% PLENTY WILL BE CHARGE.
"Y" APPLE TO HIGH COURT TO STAY THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER.
SIR, PLEASE CLEAR ME THE FOLLOWING SOME POINT ON BEHALF OF "Y":
1. IS IT OUR LIABILITY INCURRED TO PAY UNDER WC POLICY IN THE ABOVE CIRCUMSTANCE?
2. IF THE HIGH COURT WILL REMAIN CONTINUE THE ORDER TO PAY THEN CAN WE GET REIMBURSEMENT THE COMPENSATION WITH THE INSURED COMPANY?
3.IS THE HIGH COURT WILL ORDER TO STAY AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER?
4. CAN THE COURT MAKE THE PARTY TO INSURANCE COMPANY ALSO?
5. CAN WE ASK WITH COURT THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE COMES UNDER MV ACT AND THE DEPENDENT OF "X" MAY CLAIM THROUGH MV ACT?
6. WHAT WILL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF "Y" TO ARRANGE TO PAY THE COMPENSATION TO DEPENDENT OF "X" UNDER THE MV ACT?
WE HAVE THE ORDER OF WC COMMISSIONER IF REQUIRED WILL ATTACHED IN MAIL TO GET THE GUIDANCE OF EXPERT.
PLEASE GUIDE.
MAHESH PRASAD GUPTA (MANAGER HR) "Y" COMPANY
From India, Delhi
3REPORT TO POLICE STATION, FIR DONE, POSTMORTEM DONE, ARRANGE TO SEND HIS BODY TO HIS NATIVE ALONG WITH FUNERAL EXPENSES Rs. 25000/- AND HANDOVER HIS DEAD BODY TO HIS DEPENDENT.
FURTHER ALSO ARRANGE TO PAID TO HIS DEPENDENT HIS DUES WITH Y COMPANY.
THEN AFTER FEW MONTH X SEND A LEGAL NOTICE REGARDING TO PAY HIS COMPENSATION BUT WE "Y" REPLIED HIM YOUR DEATH IS NOT COVERED UNDER WC ACT BECAUSE YOUR ACCIDENT HAPPENED AT ROAD DURING PERSONNEL WORK. FOR YOUR INFORMATION WE "Y" COVERED UNDER WC POLICY.
DEPENDENT OF "X" CLAIM AT HIS LOCAL JAN ADDALAT COURT, DURING TWO AND HALF YEAR SO MANY HEARING HAPPENED AT JAN LOK ADDALATE AND HE AWARD TO PAY Rs. 160000/- TO THE DEPENDENT OF DECEASED BUT THE "Y" COMPANY NOT OBEY THE SAME.
DEPENDENT OF "X" CLAIM AT THE COURT OF WC COMMISSIONER AND THE COMMISSIONER AWARDED TO PAY Rs. 10,75,000/- COMPENSATION AS PER THE RULE ALONG WITH THE ENTREST OF THE GAPE PERIOD IN CASE OF DIS OBEY 50% PLENTY WILL BE CHARGE.
"Y" APPLE TO HIGH COURT TO STAY THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER.
SIR, PLEASE CLEAR ME THE FOLLOWING SOME POINT ON BEHALF OF "Y":
1. IS IT OUR LIABILITY INCURRED TO PAY UNDER WC POLICY IN THE ABOVE CIRCUMSTANCE?
2. IF THE HIGH COURT WILL REMAIN CONTINUE THE ORDER TO PAY THEN CAN WE GET REIMBURSEMENT THE COMPENSATION WITH THE INSURED COMPANY?
3.IS THE HIGH COURT WILL ORDER TO STAY AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER?
4. CAN THE COURT MAKE THE PARTY TO INSURANCE COMPANY ALSO?
5. CAN WE ASK WITH COURT THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE COMES UNDER MV ACT AND THE DEPENDENT OF "X" MAY CLAIM THROUGH MV ACT?
6. WHAT WILL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF "Y" TO ARRANGE TO PAY THE COMPENSATION TO DEPENDENT OF "X" UNDER THE MV ACT?
WE HAVE THE ORDER OF WC COMMISSIONER IF REQUIRED WILL ATTACHED IN MAIL TO GET THE GUIDANCE OF EXPERT.
PLEASE GUIDE.
MAHESH PRASAD GUPTA (MANAGER HR) "Y" COMPANY
From India, Delhi
Dear Mahesh
First of all I would like to tell you one thing. Do not type your query in full Capital Letters. It is as like shouting with Anger.
Please reply to the following questions
1. What is time and date of Accident?
2. Did the police register the FIR as per MV Act.
3. Did the deceased attended office on that day of accident and what is his In Time and Out Time from Office Premises?
4. What is his nature of job. Is he office based employee or Field Based employee.
5. Who informed the police and you about the accident.
6. Did he stay at your premises or in company allotted accommodation.
7. What is the base of Jan Adalat and how they derived the compensation amount.
8. Did the police investigated the accident and traced the culprit. (Hope the accident was not made by your company vehicle)
9. Did the Legal heir of the deceased got the "NO FAULT LIABILITY" from the Vehicle Owner who committed the accident.
10. What was the Final verdict given by the MACT Court.
11. How suddenly the WC Commissioner declared that huge amount? Have you explained that he was not on Duty and this accident took place at his resident area and not while commuting to / from office hours.
12. To prove about his Off duty hours due you have any evidence to produce in the court about the Biometric Attendance or any In time and Out time system in your office. (If your office is not working round the clock and following the general working hours then you can defend your case by producing the data, and to support the Office opening and locking system and the register to that effect must have maintained by the Security deployed in your office.
Further I would like to tell that one cannot claim WC Claim as well as Motor Accident Claim. If you have the proof that the legal heir of the deceased got settled with the MACT, then you can use the same data for your defence and you need not to give any compensation. But you must pay the Terminal benefits to the legal heir of the Deceased.
From India, Kumbakonam
First of all I would like to tell you one thing. Do not type your query in full Capital Letters. It is as like shouting with Anger.
Please reply to the following questions
1. What is time and date of Accident?
2. Did the police register the FIR as per MV Act.
3. Did the deceased attended office on that day of accident and what is his In Time and Out Time from Office Premises?
4. What is his nature of job. Is he office based employee or Field Based employee.
5. Who informed the police and you about the accident.
6. Did he stay at your premises or in company allotted accommodation.
7. What is the base of Jan Adalat and how they derived the compensation amount.
8. Did the police investigated the accident and traced the culprit. (Hope the accident was not made by your company vehicle)
9. Did the Legal heir of the deceased got the "NO FAULT LIABILITY" from the Vehicle Owner who committed the accident.
10. What was the Final verdict given by the MACT Court.
11. How suddenly the WC Commissioner declared that huge amount? Have you explained that he was not on Duty and this accident took place at his resident area and not while commuting to / from office hours.
12. To prove about his Off duty hours due you have any evidence to produce in the court about the Biometric Attendance or any In time and Out time system in your office. (If your office is not working round the clock and following the general working hours then you can defend your case by producing the data, and to support the Office opening and locking system and the register to that effect must have maintained by the Security deployed in your office.
Further I would like to tell that one cannot claim WC Claim as well as Motor Accident Claim. If you have the proof that the legal heir of the deceased got settled with the MACT, then you can use the same data for your defence and you need not to give any compensation. But you must pay the Terminal benefits to the legal heir of the Deceased.
From India, Kumbakonam
Thnks for yr suggestion, will care next onward.
1.Sunday (6th March'2011 ) Time 10:30PM.
2.Yes, registered as per MV Act.
3. No, but stay at campus.
4. Send blaster, filed based worker.
5. Local public inform to police and police inform to us.
6. Stay at workers hutment.
7. Dependant of deceased approach to Lokaddalat & his lawyer has fix the amount Rs. 160000/- to show against his various dues with company.
8. Police Caught the vehicle collide with bike and the vehicle owner get release vehicle from court after 1 months.
9. No idea whether owner send "NO FAULT LIABILITY" or not, but the representative of local area police station present to Jan Addalat and submit his report on call of Jan Addalat to local Police.
10. May available with Police Station.
11. Calculated as per WC Act and add the entrest of gap period.
12. First he was a field worker and our office hr be general shift only, due to Sunday no work going on that day (i.e. the period is after 6 PM 5th March'11 to 9AM 7th March'11).
=> Please describe what is under terminal benefit.
Now the status of the case at present, we approach to High court and our Principle Employer deposited through DD of the compensation amount to WC Commissioner and reverse charge to me. (Noted here the WC Commissioner order to PE to submit the compensation within 30 days, so the PE submitting within time frame)
Please guide how explain to PE and same time with WC Commissioner.
Regards,
Mahesh Prasad Gupta
From India, Delhi
1.Sunday (6th March'2011 ) Time 10:30PM.
2.Yes, registered as per MV Act.
3. No, but stay at campus.
4. Send blaster, filed based worker.
5. Local public inform to police and police inform to us.
6. Stay at workers hutment.
7. Dependant of deceased approach to Lokaddalat & his lawyer has fix the amount Rs. 160000/- to show against his various dues with company.
8. Police Caught the vehicle collide with bike and the vehicle owner get release vehicle from court after 1 months.
9. No idea whether owner send "NO FAULT LIABILITY" or not, but the representative of local area police station present to Jan Addalat and submit his report on call of Jan Addalat to local Police.
10. May available with Police Station.
11. Calculated as per WC Act and add the entrest of gap period.
12. First he was a field worker and our office hr be general shift only, due to Sunday no work going on that day (i.e. the period is after 6 PM 5th March'11 to 9AM 7th March'11).
=> Please describe what is under terminal benefit.
Now the status of the case at present, we approach to High court and our Principle Employer deposited through DD of the compensation amount to WC Commissioner and reverse charge to me. (Noted here the WC Commissioner order to PE to submit the compensation within 30 days, so the PE submitting within time frame)
Please guide how explain to PE and same time with WC Commissioner.
Regards,
Mahesh Prasad Gupta
From India, Delhi
As per the WC Act, (now known as the Employees Compensation Act), the employer is liable to pay compensation if the personal injury is caused due to an accident arising out of and in the course of employment. In this case since the accident took place not 'out of and in the course of employment', there is prima facie no liability to pay compensation. The theory of notional extension is applicable for accidents arising on the way to work place or going from workplace to home in the normal route. As per the details given above, this is not the case here. Therefore, I feel you should be able to win the case in the High Court if you engage a proper advocate.
From India, Madras
From India, Madras
Section 3(1) Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 provides that the injury must be caused to workman by an accident arising out of and in the course of employment. Employment does not necessarily ends when the tool down signal is given or when the workman leaves the actual workshop. There is a notional extension at both the entry and exit time and space. As employment may end or may begin not only when the employee begins to work or leaves his tools but also when he used the means of access and egress to and from the place of employment.
As a rule, the employment of a workman does not commence until he has reached the place of employment and does not continue when he has left the place of employment, the journey to and from the place of employment being excluded. It is now well-settled, however, that this is subject to the theory of notional extension of the employer’s premises so as to include an area which the workman passes and repasses in going to and in leaving the actual place of work. There may be some reasonable extension in both time and place and a workman may be regarded as in the course of his employment even though he had not reached or had left his employer’s premises. The facts and circumstances of each case will have to be examined very carefully in order to determine whether the accident arose out of and in the course of the employment of a workman, keeping in view at all times this theory of notional extension.
Various judgments of Supreme court and different high Courts have considered the concept of notional employment and said that if the employee dies due to accident while going to work place from residence or while returning from work place to residence, as an accident arising out of and during the course of employment and as such entitled for compensation in accordance with provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act.
The concept of notional extension under the Workmen’s Compensation Act for granting compensation will be applicable when there has been unrebutted evidence to show that the death of the deceased has occurred due to stress and strain resulting in cardiac arrest on his way while he was returning after duty.
Although this doctrine is not specifically enshrined under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, this is an accepted legal principle. Under ESI, if any accident happens outside the premises within one kilometer radius from the work premises during reasonable office related hours it will be considered as employment injury. Same logic will be applicable for Workmen’s Compensation Act also.
If accident happens in the company provided vehicle, irrespective of the location and time it is employment injury for consideration under Workmen Compensation Act.
From India, Madras
As a rule, the employment of a workman does not commence until he has reached the place of employment and does not continue when he has left the place of employment, the journey to and from the place of employment being excluded. It is now well-settled, however, that this is subject to the theory of notional extension of the employer’s premises so as to include an area which the workman passes and repasses in going to and in leaving the actual place of work. There may be some reasonable extension in both time and place and a workman may be regarded as in the course of his employment even though he had not reached or had left his employer’s premises. The facts and circumstances of each case will have to be examined very carefully in order to determine whether the accident arose out of and in the course of the employment of a workman, keeping in view at all times this theory of notional extension.
Various judgments of Supreme court and different high Courts have considered the concept of notional employment and said that if the employee dies due to accident while going to work place from residence or while returning from work place to residence, as an accident arising out of and during the course of employment and as such entitled for compensation in accordance with provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act.
The concept of notional extension under the Workmen’s Compensation Act for granting compensation will be applicable when there has been unrebutted evidence to show that the death of the deceased has occurred due to stress and strain resulting in cardiac arrest on his way while he was returning after duty.
Although this doctrine is not specifically enshrined under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, this is an accepted legal principle. Under ESI, if any accident happens outside the premises within one kilometer radius from the work premises during reasonable office related hours it will be considered as employment injury. Same logic will be applicable for Workmen’s Compensation Act also.
If accident happens in the company provided vehicle, irrespective of the location and time it is employment injury for consideration under Workmen Compensation Act.
From India, Madras
In this case will insurance company reimbursement to Y company, while the WC commissioner order to pay the compensation. If insurance company denied to pay, then what should be our strategy. Please describe.
From India, Delhi
From India, Delhi
NO The insurance company will not make any payment. The accident took place on Sunday at Night 10:30 pm. The person was given accommodation to support him and there is no obligation to the company to give any accommodation to the workers (specialised works).
The case is prima facie evident that the legal heirs of the deceased cannot claim anything except his terminal benefits like retrenchment compensation, notice pay, gratuity etc.
Once the legal heirs got the No Fault Liability from the vehicle owner then he cannot claim any other benefits under the WC Act.
From India, Kumbakonam
The case is prima facie evident that the legal heirs of the deceased cannot claim anything except his terminal benefits like retrenchment compensation, notice pay, gratuity etc.
Once the legal heirs got the No Fault Liability from the vehicle owner then he cannot claim any other benefits under the WC Act.
From India, Kumbakonam
Now the high court, cuttack, Orissa has order to stop the disbruse the deposited amount to the WC commissioner till further order.
From India, Delhi
From India, Delhi
Dear Sir,
Please share further update on this case since, same case has happen in our company, one of the worker fall in labour camp on sunday while doing something, got injury on his head and subsequently got dead.
wanted to know whether am I liable to pay compensation under WC Act, since accident occurred on sunday.
Vishal Saundankar
From India, Nashik
Please share further update on this case since, same case has happen in our company, one of the worker fall in labour camp on sunday while doing something, got injury on his head and subsequently got dead.
wanted to know whether am I liable to pay compensation under WC Act, since accident occurred on sunday.
Vishal Saundankar
From India, Nashik
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.
Published_draft _rules_on Employees_ compensation 3.6.2020.pdf
Compensation Benchmarking Survey.doc