The Court dismissed appeals challenging a Workmen's Compensation Commissioner's award. It held that the wage amendment notification was not retrospective and did not apply to accidents before its publication. The insurer's appeal against coverage was also dismissed.
Dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 14TH PHALGUNA, 1945
MFA (ECC) NO. 172 OF 2012
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20.10.2011 IN WCC NO.44 OF 2009 OF THE
COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
APPELLANT/APPLICANT:
GOPALAKRISHNAN
S/O. SUBBAYYAN IYYER, KAKKAYILVILA PUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU, KALLINGAL, KULATHOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.V.ANOOP
SRI.K.V.SREERAJ
RESPONDENTS/OPPOSITE PARTIES:
1 MANAGER OCEANUS BLUE MOUNT, M/S. OCEANUS DWELLING PRIVATE LIMITED, SREEKARIYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 007
2MANAGER
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
EAST WING, 5TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING,
M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN THIRUVALLA
SRI.S.VAIDYANATHAN
THIS MFA (ECC) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON 04.03.2024,
ALONG WITH MFA (ECC).131/2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2
MFA (ECC) Nos.172 of 2012 & 131 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 14TH PHALGUNA, 1945
MFA (ECC) NO. 131 OF 2013
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20.10.2011 IN WCC NO.44 OF 2009 OF THE
COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
APPELLANT/2ND OPPOSITE PARTY:
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.
KOCHI-31,REP.BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER,
REGIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM
BY ADV SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA)
RESPONDENTS/APPLICANT AND 1ST OPPOSITE PARTY:
1GOPALAKRISHNAN
S/O.SUBBAYYAN IYYER,
KAKKAYILVILA PUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU,
KALLINGAL, KULATHOOR P O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 001
2THE MANAGER
OCEANUS BLUE MOUNT,
M/S.OCEANUS DWELLING PVT LTD,
SREEKARIYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 001
BY ADVS.
P.V.ANOOP
THOMAS P.KURUVILLA
K.V.SREERAJ
P.PRIJITH
P.MARTIN JOSE
THIS MFA (ECC) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON 04.03.2024, ALONG
WITH MFA (ECC).172/2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
3
MFA (ECC) Nos.172 of 2012 & 131 of 2013
FOLLOWING:
T.R.RAVI.J
MFA (ECC) Nos.172 of 2012 & 131 of 2013
Dated this the 04th day of March, 2024
JUDGMENT
Both these cases arise from the order dated 20.10.2011
in WC Case No.44 of 2009 before the Court of Commissioner
for Workmen’s Compensation, Thiruvananthapuram. The appellant in MFA No.172 of 2012 is the claimant before the Commissioner. He was a headload worker, who has injured during the course of employment and suffered 24% disability. The employer and the insurer remained ex-parte before the Commissioner. Commissioner fixed compensation based on a wage of Rs.4,000/- per month. The accident took place on 23.03.2008 and the order of the Commissioner was issued on
4
MFA (ECC) Nos.172 of 2012 & 131 of 2013
20.10.2011. The contention of the appellant in MFA No.172 of
2012 is that on 31.05.2010, a notification had been issued amending the monthly wages as per the Workmen’s Compensation Act re-fixing the same as Rs.8,000/- per month instead of Rs.4,000/- per month. It is hence contended that
the benefit of the said amendment should be available to all orders issued by the Commissioner after the date of the amendment.
5
MFA (ECC) Nos.172 of 2012 & 131 of 2013
says that it will come into effect from the date of the
publication of the notification. Sinc e there is no r etrospective operation of the amendment, I do not find anything wrong with the order passed by the Commissioner. No grounds made
out warranting interference with the order of the
Commissioner. MFA No.172 of 2012 fails and is dismissed.
the Contractor’s All risks policy. The order of the Commissioner shows that the insurance company did not appear and file any reply, that they were declared ex-parte and that an adverse inference was drawn that the company is admitting all the averments set forth by the applicant. I do
6
MFA (ECC) Nos.172 of 2012 & 131 of 2013
not think that the said findings should be set aside in an
appeal filed by the Insurance Company, particularly in case of claims under a beneficial legislation. MFA No.131 of 2013
fails and is dismissed.
Sd/-
T.R.RAVI
JUDGE
sn
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the amendment to monthly wages under the Workmen's Compensation Act applies retrospectively to accidents occurring prior to the notification.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
GOPALAKRISHNAN
MANAGER OCEANUS BLUE MOUNT
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.
T.R.RAVI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court