Gayathri Nathan … vs Isakkiammal
2021 Latest Caselaw 1463 Mad

                                                                         C.M.A.No.508 of 2016 and
                                                                           C.M.P.No.4303 of 2016

                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                DATED : 22.01.2021

                                                      CORAM

                             THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

                                              C.M.A.No.508 of 2016 and
                                               C.M.P.No.4303 of 2016
                      Gayathri Nathan                                         … Appellant
                                                        Vs.
                      1.Isakkiammal
                      2.Minor Isakki Sankar

                      3.Minor Isakkiammal

                      4.Velammal

                      5.Rajan

                      6.Vikram P.Kajjar                                     … Respondents

                      PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 30 of the
                      Employees Compensation Act, 1923, against the fair and decreetal order
                      dated 16.10.2015 made in E.C.No.16 of 2012 on the file of the
                      Commissioner of Workmen Compensation / Deputy Commissioner of
                      Labour, Coimbatore.
                                   For Appellant      : Mr.S.Mukunth
                                   For Respondents : No appearance for R1 to R4
                                                      R5 & R6 - NRN



                      1/6
http://www.judis.nic.in
                                                                            C.M.A.No.508 of 2016 and
                                                                              C.M.P.No.4303 of 2016

                                                 JUDGMENT

The decreetal order dated 30.11.2015 passed in E.C.No.16 of

2012, is under challenge in the present civil miscellaneous appeal.

2. The third respondent in the claim petition is the appellant in the

present appeal. The petition was filed by the respondents 1 to 4 claiming

compensation mainly on the ground that the deceased sudalaimuthu is

the husband of the first claimant and the father of the other two minor

claimants. On 28.10.2010, when the deceased sudalaimuthu was

working in the building belongs to the appellant, got electrocuted and

died immediately. A criminal case was registered in Crime No.1454 of

2010. The legal heirs of the deceased filed an application seeking

compensation.

3. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour adjudicated the issues

with reference to the documents and evidences produced by the

respective parties. Perusal of the award reveals that the employee

employer relationship existed at the time of the accident as the deceased

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.508 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.4303 of 2016

was working in the building constructed by the appellant. The factum

regarding the electrocution was also established and a criminal case was

also registered in this regard. Thus, there is no error in respect of the

finding with reference to the factum regarding the accident.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant mainly contended that the

appellant is the principal employer who engaged the respondents 5 and 6

as Mason and contractor. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour fixed the

liability on the appellant as a principal employer and failed to permit the

appellant to recover the compensation from the contractor and mason

who actually employed the deceased for work in the construction

building.

5. This Court is of the considered opinion that the factum

regarding the accident was established and the deceased died during the

course of employment. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour has rightly

fixed the liability on the principal employer as per the provisions of the

Act. However, the principal employer is entitled to recover the award

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.508 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.4303 of 2016

amount from the mason and contractor who actually employed the

deceased. In the present case, the appellant has to settle the

compensation amount at the first instance to the legal heirs of the

deceased and thereafter recover the same from the respondents 5 and 6.

6. Accordingly, the fair and decreetal order dated 30.11.2015

passed in E.C.No.16 of 2012, stands confirmed with reference to the

liability fixed on the appellant for payment of compensation along with

interest is concerned. However, the appellant is permitted to recover the

award amount with interest from the respondents 5 and 6 who are the

mason and contractor.

7. With this modification, the award dated 30.11.2015 passed in

E.C.No.16 of 2012, stands modified. Consequently, C.M.A.No.508 of

2016, stands allowed in part. No costs. Consequently, connected

miscellaneous petition is closed.

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.508 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.4303 of 2016

8. The major respondents alone are permitted to withdraw their

respective portion of the award by filing an appropriate application and

payments are to be made through RTGS. As far as the minor

respondents are concerned, the said amount shall be deposited in an

interest bearing scheme in any one of the Nationalised Bank and

renewed periodically till they attain majority.

22.01.2021 Index: Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-Speaking Order gsk

To The Commissioner of Workmen Compensation / Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Coimbatore.

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.508 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.4303 of 2016

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

gsk

C.M.A.No.508 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.4303 of 2016

22.01.2021

http://www.judis.nic.in