M/S.Associated Civil ... vs Mr.K.Subramani …
2021 Latest Caselaw 1464 Mad

                                                                        C.M.A.No.471 of 2016 and
                                                                          C.M.P.No.3628 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.471 of 2016 and
                                             C.M.P.No.3628 of 2016

                      M/s.Associated Civil Constructions (P) Limited,
                      Plot No.42/43, V.G.P.Santhanammal Nagar,
                      Gowrivakkam, Chennai 601 302.
                                                                             … Appellant

                                                       Vs.

                      Mr.K.Subramani                                         … Respondent

                      PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 30 of the

                      Employees Compensation Act, 1923, against the award dated

                      30.09.2015 in W.C.No.373 of 2006 by the Deputy Commissioner of

                      Labour-II, Workmen Compensation, Chennai.



                                  For Appellant     : Mr.R.Munuswamy

                                  For Respondent    : Mr.K.V.Muthuvisakan




                      1/6
http://www.judis.nic.in
                                                                             C.M.A.No.471 of 2016 and
                                                                               C.M.P.No.3628 of 2016

                                                   JUDGMENT

The award dated 30.09.2015 passed in W.C.No.373 of 2006, is

under challenge in the present civil miscellaneous appeal.

2. The substantial questions of law raised in the appeal are that

had not the authority caused miscarriage of justice in not appreciating

and considering the preliminary issue raised by the appellant as to

whether the respondent/claimant proved the employer and employee

relationship. Admittedly, the doctor who has given disability certificate,

has not treated the claimant. Therefore, the disability percentage fixed

by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour is incorrect. While deciding the

quantum of monthly salary, the Deputy Commissioner of Labour is not

in consonance with the provisions of the Act. The authority has erred in

not appreciating the humane tendency shown by the appellant. All the

substantial questions of law raised is related to the factual aspects as far

as the employee employer relationship is concerned.

3. A claim petition was filed by the respondent mainly on the

ground that when he was working at the second floor of the building

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.471 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.3628 of 2016

standing on the scaffolding at Plot No.17, Gate No.6, Saibaba Koil

Street, Gowriwakkam, the other workers removed the scaffolding,

thereby the claimant fell down from the second floor to ground floor on

20.12.2005. The claimant sustained grievous and multiple injuries all

over the body and the disability was assessed as 70% by the doctor.

4. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour adjudicated the issues

with reference to the documents and evidences. The findings of the

award reveals that the appellant had denied the employee employer

relationship. However, the fact remains that the appellant has spent

Rs.35,000/- towards medical expenses, soon after the claimant met with

an accident. It is unbelievable that only on humanitarian ground, the

appellant has spent a sum of Rs.35,000/- towards medical expenses for

unknown person. When the fact remains that the claimant was working

in the second floor of the building under construction and the

construction activated was undertaken by the appellant construction

company, there is no reason to believe the statement made by the

appellant in this regard.

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.471 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.3628 of 2016

5. Undoubtedly, the medical expenses could not have been spent

on humanitarian ground. The fact remains that the accident was

immediately known to the appellant company and admitted the claimant

in hospital, this fact is sufficient to draw factual inference that the

employee employer relationship existed at the time of accident. This

apart, as per Ex.P.W.1 deposition, he could able to establish that he is an

employee under the appellant Construction Company. The Deputy

Commissioner of Labour considered all these issues and fixed the

liability on the appellant by awarding compensation of Rs.1,94,532/-

along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. This Court did not find

any perversity or infirmity as such in respect of the finding arrived and

the quantum of compensation awarded in favour of the claimant.

6. Accordingly, the award dated 30.09.2015 in W.C.No.373 of

2006, stands confirmed and C.M.A.No.471 of 2016 stands dismissed.

No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

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

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.471 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.3628 of 2016

To The Deputy Commissioner of Labour-II,

Workmen Compensation, Chennai.

http://www.judis.nic.in C.M.A.No.471 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.3628 of 2016

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

gsk

C.M.A.No.471 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.3628 of 2016

22.01.2021

http://www.judis.nic.in