In this appeal against a compensation award, the Court held that a school-going student injured while working during the harvest season was an employee. The Judge rejected the insurer's argument that school admission precludes employment status.
Appeal dismissed being devoid of merits; findings of Commissioner upheld.
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 PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CASE NO.: F.A.O. No. 3395 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION : July 6,2009
United India Insurance Company Ltd.
.......Appellant
versus
Harpal Singh and others
......Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR
PRESENT: Mr. Sanjiv Pabbi, Advocate for the appellant.
NIRMALJIT KAUR, J.
This is an appeal against the award dated 26-03-2009 passed by the Commissioner, Karnal under Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.
Brief facts of the case are that on 24-07-2003, the claimant himself was harvesting the paddy crop in the fields of Gurmukh Singh, while, the respondent was working on the combine. He was hit by the cutter of the combine and due to this, he received multiple, serious and grievous injuries, specially on the left arm, which was later on amputated. He was about 17 years of age at the time of accident. The appellant-United India Insurance Company Limited was directed to pay the compensation, calculated, in accordance with Section 4-A of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 which was assessed to the tune of Rs.2,55,012/@ 12%. The Board of Doctors' assessed the disability of the claim @ 85%. The only argument raised by learned counsel for the appellant is that the School Certificate of the claimant Exhibit R-2 clearly shows that the
F.A.O. No.3395 of 2009 -2-
claimant was a student and, therefore, under no stretch of imagination, he be considered to be an employee of Gurmeet Singh. It is not possible to accept this argument of learned counsel for the appellant. The claimant received injury while working on the combine during harvesting season. The harvesting machine is used for agricultural purposes in the villages. During the harvesting season, by and large, almost all members of the family help out. It is not un-usual for students to also work in the fields even though they have taken admission in the Village school. The attendance of the Schools is never 100%. Mostly, in fact, the attendance in schools, situated in the Village, is normally low. Nothing has been placed on record to show that the claimant was present in the School on the date of accident.
No law point was raised.
For the reasons recorded here-in-above, I find no reason to interfere with the findings recorded by the Commissioner, Karnal on 26-03-2009 under Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.
The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed being devoid of merits.
(NIRMALJIT KAUR) JUDGE
July 6, 2009 gurpreet
Whether to be referred to the Reporter : Yes / No
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a school-going student engaged in agricultural work on the date of accident can be considered an employee for claims under the Workmen's Compensation Act.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
United India Insurance Company Ltd.
Harpal Singh
Nirmaljit Kaur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
