Dhanasekaran vs Duraisamy
2021 Latest Caselaw 4243 Mad

                                                                            C.M.A.No.2312 of 2018

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED : 18.02.2021

                                                       CORAM

                            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

                                                C.M.A.No.2312 of 2018


                     Dhanasekaran                                              ..Appellant
                                                         Vs.

                     1.Duraisamy
                     (Notice to R1 may be dispensed with
                     for the Set ex-parte before the Tribunal)

                     2.Iffco-Tokio General Insurance Co., Ltd.,
                       JH Towers, 2nd Floor,
                       L.I.C.Colony Road,
                       Salem.                                                 ..Respondents

                     Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 30 of the
                     Workmen's Compensation Act, against the order dated 31.07.2017 made
                     in W.C.O.No.874 of 2014, N.No.694 of 2015 on the file of the Deputy
                     Commissioner of Labour/Commissioner of Workmen Compensation
                     Court, Coonoor.


                                      For Appellant    : Mr.T.S.Arthanareeswaran

                                      For Respondents : R1 – Exparte
                                                        R2 – Mr.J.Michael Visuvasam



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




                     1/4
                                                                               C.M.A.No.2312 of 2018

                                                   JUDGMENT

The Substantial Question of law raised in the present appeal is

that “Whether the learned Commissioner has committed an error by

taking the income of the injured as Rs.8,000/- as per the Act, when it

was alleged on the side of petitioner that the injured was earning

Rs.10,000/- per month and the same was also not disputed by the

respondent.”

2. The said question raised is purely a question of fact. Whether

the income of the injured is 10,000/- or not, must be established by

filing an acceptable evidence. When there is no evidence to establish the

income of the victim, then the Deputy Commissioner of Labour has to

fix the income as notified by the Central Government under Section

4(1B) of the Workmen Compensation Act.

3. During the relevant point of time, when the accident occurred,

the ceiling fixed by the Central Government in its Notification dated

31.05.2010 was Rs.8,000/- and accordingly, the monthly income of the

victim of fixed as Rs.8,000/- by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour. If

at all, the injured claims that his salary was Rs.10,000/-, then the burden https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

of proof of his side to establish the salary by producing an acceptable

C.M.A.No.2312 of 2018

evidence. In the present case, no such evidence was produced by the

claimant.

4. This being the factum, the appeal deserves no merit

consideration. This apart, the substantial question of law raised is also

relatable to the facts and therefore, the Award dated 31.07.2017 made in

W.C.No.874 of 2014 stands confirmed and the Civil Miscellaneous

Appeal in C.M.A.No.2312 of 2018 is dismissed. No costs.

18.02.2021

kak Index: Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking order

To

1. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour/Commissioner of Workmen Compensation Court, Coonoor.

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

C.M.A.No.2312 of 2018

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

kak

C.M.A.No.2312 of 2018

18.02.2021

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