The High Court disposed of writ petitions challenging an interim compensation award of Rs. 50,000. Directing the Prescribed Authority under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, to decide the pending claim petition expeditively within three months.
Directing the Prescribed Authority to decide the claim petition within three months.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writs No. 1118/2012
Shriram General Insurance Company, Through Regional Manager, Office E-8, Epip, Riico Industrial Area, Sitapura, Jaipur Through Its Constituted Attorney.
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
Connect with
S.B. Civil Writs No. 1119/2012
Shriram General Insurance Company Through Regional Manager, Office E-8, E.p.i.p. Industrial Area, Sitapura Jaipur Through Its Constituted Attorney.
----Petitioner
Versus
(2 of 3)
[CW-1118/2012]
Teh. And Distt. Bundi.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s)
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR
Order
28/11/2018
In both the writ petitions petitioner-Insurance Company has challenged the order dt. 9th December, 2011, passed by the Employee Compensation Commissioner, Bundi directing the petitioner to make the payment of Rs. 50,000/- to the claimants as interim compensation.
This Court on 16th April, 2012, admitted the writ petition and issued notices of writ petition as well as stay application to the respondents. This Court had further stayed the operation of order dt. 9th December, 2011 and observed that the Prescribed Authority will decide the application filed by the claimants-respondents expeditiously on merits in accordance with law.
Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order dt. 9th December, 2011, has wrongly granted benefit of interim compensation under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923.
Learned counsel for the claimants- Mr. Sandeep Mathur, on the other hand submitted that there is a provision under Section
(3 of 3)
[CW-1118/2012]
143 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to apply certain provisions to claim filed under the Workman Compensation Act, 1923.
It is informed to this Court that till date the main claim petition has not been decided so far and the same is still pending. This Court finds that the authority is required to decide the claim petition and the observation made by this Court on 16th April, 2012, has not been carried out so far.
This Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, deems it proper to direct the Authority under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 to decide the claim finally.
The interim award passed by the impugned order was already stayed by this Court and as such the parties would be bound by the final outcome of the claim petition and in case the claimants are held entitled for any compensation, the same would be paid to them accordingly.
Accordingly, the present writ petitions stands disposed of with the above observations. The Prescribed Authority is directed to decide the claim petition expeditiously but in no case later than three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J
Monika/105-106
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Employee Compensation Commissioner was justified in granting interim compensation without deciding the main claim petition.
Shriram General Insurance Company
Rekha Bai
Anil
Lalit
Bhim
Kalu @ Dhanraj
Ashok Kumar Gaur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
