The Managing Director vs B.N.Krishnaveni
2021 Latest Caselaw 2318 Mad

                                                                                C.M.A.No.117 of 2006

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                     DATED : 02.02.2021

                                                          CORAM

                              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

                                                    C.M.A.No.117 of 2006
                                                    C.M.P.No.2865 of 2006

                     The Managing Director,
                     The Metro Politan Transport Corporation
                     Chennai Division-I Ltd., Anna Salai,
                     Chennai-2.                                                    ..Appellant

                                                            vs.

                     1.B.N.Krishnaveni

                     2.J.Pushparani

                     3.B.N.Kavitha

                     4.Janakiammal                                        .. Respondents
                     PRAYER : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 30 of Workmen
                     Compensation Act, against the judgment dated 02.09.2002 made in
                     W.C.No.149 of 2001 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen
                     Compensation-II, Deputy Commissioner of Labour-II, Chennai.


                                   For Petitioner                 : Mr.K.Moorthy

                                   For Respondents                : Mr.V.Mohan Choudary for R1

                     1/6


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                    C.M.A.No.117 of 2006

                                                                     Batta due-RR2 to 4

                                                        ORDER

The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the judgment

dated 02.09.2002 made in W.C.No.149 of 2001 on the file of the

Commissioner for Workmen Compensation-II, Deputy Commissioner of

Labour-II, Chennai.

2. The Substantial question of law raised in the appeal on hand is that

whether the Deputy Commissioner of Labour is right in holding that the

accident took place during the course of employment; whether the Deputy

Commissioner of Labour is right in holding that the accident took place

during the negligence of the Management; whether the deceased was a

workman at the time of accident:

3. The question raised is whether the accident occurred during the

course of employment or not.

4. The respondents filed an application seeking compensation under

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.117 of 2006

the Workmen Compensation Act. It is contended that the deceased was

working with the appellant/Metro Politan Transport Corporation for a

monthly salary of Rs.4487.75/- and he was aged about 50 years at that point

of time. On 22.01.1998 at about 3.15 p.m., when the deceased was

performing his duties in order to rectify the electrical problems, the vehicle,

in which the deceased was performing works, automatically got started and

moved, at that point of time, the deceased sustained fatal injuries and died

on the spot. A criminal case was registered before the Ambattur Police

Station. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour adjudicated the issues with

reference to the documents and evidence produced. The Assistant Branch

Manager, R.W.1, has deposed before the Deputy Commissioner of Labour

that the deceased was performing certain electrical works in the vehicle and

he has not followed safety measures. Therefore, it was established before

the Deputy Commissioner of Labour that the accident occurred during the

course of employment. When the Assistant Branch Manager of the

Transport Corporation categorically deposed that the accident occurred

when the deceased was performing certain duties and responsibilities by

attending electrical repairs in the bus, there is no reason to raise the question

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.117 of 2006

regarding the employer/employee relationship as well as the accident took

place during the course of employment. When these factors are in

accordance with law, this Court is of the opinion that the Deputy

Commissioner of Labour has not committed any infirmity in passing the

award. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order

passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour. Accordingly, the award

dated 02.09.2002 made in W.C.No.149 of 2001 stands confirmed and

consequently, Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands dismissed. No costs. The

respondents/claimants are permitted to withdraw the award amount by filing

an appropriate application before the competent authority and the payments

are to be made through RTGS. Consequently, connected miscellaneous

petition is also closed.

02.02.2021

ssb Index: Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-Speaking Order

To

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.117 of 2006

Commissioner for Workmen Compensation-II, Deputy Commissioner of Labour-II, Chennai.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.No.117 of 2006

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

ssb

C.M.A.No.117 of 2006

02.02.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/