Dismissed

Ruchi Mehrotra v. the Dy Labour Commissioner & Anr.

Delhi HC3 Aug 2017FAO/193/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Delhi dismissed an appeal against the dismissal of the appellant's compensation claim. The court held that a heart attack suffered while watching television late at night on an official tour, without evidence of work-related stress, did not arise out of or in the course of employment.

What did the court decide?

Compensation application of the appellant was dismissed.

Ruchi Mehrotra Vs the Dy Labour Commissioner… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2017)

¶1

$~25

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 03^rd August, 2017

¶4

FAO 193/2016 RUCHI MEHROTRA ..... Appellant

¶5

Through: Mr. Inder Jit Singh and Mr. Bijay Kumar, Advocates

¶6

versus

¶7

THE DY LABOUR COMMISSIONER & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Urvashi M. Uppal proxy for Mr. Devesh Singh, Advocate for respondent No.1 Mr. S.K. Sinha, Advocate for respondent No.2

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA

¶9

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

¶10

The appellant has challenged the order dated 09^th February, 2016 whereby the appellant’s application for compensation has been dismissed by the Commissioner, Employees’ Compensation.

¶11

The appellant is the widow of late Sandeep Mehrotra, Joint Regional Manager of respondent No.2, drawing a salary of Rs.77,586/- per month. On 08^th April, 2012, Sandeep Mehrotra came from Nagpur to Delhi and he left Delhi on 12^th April, 2012 for Nagpur. On 16^th April, 2012, Sandeep Mehrotra and Mr. Rohit Srivastava, Area Manager of respondent No.2, went to Bhusawal by train for official work. They reached Bhusawal at 2:30 P.M.

¶12

FAO 193/2016 Page 1 of 3

¶13

and stayed at Hotel Aditya where Sandeep Mehrotra suffered a heart attack which resulted in his death. The appellant filed an application for compensation claiming that the deceased was under the stress and strain due to the employment and, therefore, it is an accident during the course and arising out of his employment.

¶14

The Commissioner, Employees’ Compensation held that the deceased had gone for inspection at about 06:30 P.M. on 16^th April, 2012 and had taken his dinner at 7:45 P.M. and at around 10:00 P.M. while he was watching television in his room, he suffered a heart attack and he did not die during the course of his employment.

¶15

Learned counsel for the appellant urged at the time of the hearing that the deceased suffered heart attack due to the stress and strain of his employment while he was on official tour. Therefore the death of Sandeep Mehrotra arose out of and during the course his employment with respondent no.2.

¶16

Learned counsel for the respondent urged at the time of the hearing that the heart attack suffered by the deceased is not an accident. It is further submitted that there is no nexus between the heart attack and the employment.

¶17

In the present case, the deceased had gone on a tour to Bhusawal along with his colleague on 16^th April, 2012; he completed his official work by about 07:30 P.M.; returned back to the hotel thereafter; took dinner at 07:45 P.M.; and was watching T.V. at 10:00 P.M. when he suffered heart attack. No material has been placed on record to show that any stress or strain was involved in his work or the heart attack was a result of the nature of job. There is no casual connection or nexus between employment and the

¶18

FAO 193/2016 Page 2 of 3

¶19

death due to heart attack. In that view of the matter, the appellant is not entitled to any compensation from the respondent.

¶20

There is no merit in this appeal, which is hereby dismissed.

¶21

AUGUST 03, 2017 Rsk

¶22

J.R. MIDHA, J.

¶23

FAO 193/2016 Page 3 of 3

Ruchi Mehrotra v. the Dy Labour Commissioner & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ruchi Mehrotra v. the Dy Labour Commissioner & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

D.T.C. Vs Harish Ahuja & Anr.

Vijay Mohan & Anr. Vs Pawan Kumar & Ors.

Anuj Kumar Singh Vs Yogendra Prasad Singh

Sandesh Kumar Dutta & Ors. Vs Gurdip Singh & Ors.

Anil Kumar Chauhan Vs Estate Officer and Asst Director of Estates (Litigation).

Anthony Jose Vs Linda Anthony