Chayabai Roopchand Surase vs Uday Expoxy, Prop. Rajendra ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 9782 Bom

                                            1
                                                                      13514.22CA

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                      23 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.13514 OF 2022
                                 IN FA/1075/2022

                       CHAYABAI ROOPCHAND SURASE
                                   VERSUS
                           UDAY EXPOXY AND ANR
                                      ...
          Ms. Savita P. Kakade (Matkar), advocate for the applicant
          Mr.S.R. Bodade, advocate for respondent no.1.
                                      ...
                                    CORAM : S.G.DIGE, J.
                                     DATE : 26.09.2022
          P.C. :

          1.               Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and
          learned counsel for respondent no.1.


          2.               The learned counsel for the applicant submits
          that the Commissioner for Employees Compensation and
          Judge, Labour Court, Aurangabad has awarded the
          compensation in favour of the applicant. Respondent no.1
          has challenged the said judgment and award and has
          deposited the award amount before the Labour Court,
          Aurangabad. The applicant is the mother of the deceased.
          She requires the amount for her daily expenses and medical
          treatment. Hence requested to allow the application.


          3.               The learned counsel for respondent no.1
          vehemently opposed to allow the application on the ground




::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2022                     ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2022 06:14:11 :::
                                             2
                                                                       13514.22CA

          that the deceased was resident of Murmi and his office was
          situated at Murmi whereas the accident was occurred near
          Garware Company, which is contrary. The relationship of
          the employer and employee is disputed. Hence, requested to
          dismiss the application.


          4.               I have heard both the learned counsel.


          5.               The applicant is mother of the deceased. Before
          the Labour Court the employer has admitted that the
          deceased was his employee. The applicant needed the
          amount for her daily expenses and medical treatment.
          Hence I pass the following order :-
                                        ORDER

(i) The application is allowed.

(ii) The applicant is permitted to withdraw Rs.4,40,000/- on furnishing the usual undertaking before the learned Registrar (Judicial).

(iii) The application is disposed of accordingly.

[S.G.DIGE] JUDGE SGA