The Managing Director vs K.Pandiyammal
2024 Latest Caselaw 17442 Mad

Madras High Court

The Managing Director vs K.Pandiyammal on 3 September, 2024

                                                                          C.M.A.(MD)No.1032 of 2024

                          BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                   Dated : 03.09.2024

                                                         CORAM :

                            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

                                        C.M.A(MD)No.1032 of 2024
                                     and C.M.P(MD)No.10820 of 2024
                     The Managing Director,
                     Ramanathapuram District Cooperative Spinning Mills Ltd.,
                     Achangulam,
                     Kamuthi Taluk,
                     Ramanathapuram District 623 601     ... Appellant/Respondent
                                                     Vs.
                     K.Pandiyammal                      ...Respondent/Applicant


                     PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 30 of the

                     Employees Compensation Act, 1923 against the order passed in E.C.No.

                     86 of 2021 on the file of the Joint Commissioner of Labour, Madurai,

                     Authority under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 dated

                     28.05.2024.

                                       For Appellant     : Mr.C.Vakeeswaran
                                       For Respondent     : No appearance

                                                        JUDGMENT

The appeal challenges the award of the Labour Commissioner

granting compensation to the respondent.

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

2. The respondent filed a claim petition stating that while her

husband was working in the mill of the appellant, he met with an

accident, while going to his work place for the shift, which commenced

at 7.30 a.m; that he sustained fatal injuries and that the death was caused

due to an accident during the course of employment.

3. The appellant filed a counter stating that the accident took place

outside the workplace and not in the course of employment.

4. Before the Commissioner, the appellant examined herself as

P.W.1 and marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.19. The respondent examined R.W.1

and marked Ex.R.1 to Ex.R.9.

5. The Commissioner, after taking into consideration the oral and

documentary evidence, held that the accident took place during the

course of employment and held the appellant liable to pay compensation.

The factual finding of the Commissioner, that the accident took place

while the deceased was going to his workplace and therefore it was

during the course of employment, is based on the available record. The

Commissioner, being the fact finding authority, the point raised by the

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

appellant, which is factual in nature, cannot be entertained as no

substantial question of law is involved in the instant appeal so as to

warrant interference in the award passed by the Commissioner.

6. In fine, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the

appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected

miscellaneous petition is closed.

                                                                              03.09.2024
                     Index                    : Yes / No
                     Neutral Citation         : Yes / No
                     CM



                     To

1. The Joint Commissioner of Labour, Madurai

2. The Section Officer, V.R.Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

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

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

CM

Judgment made in

and C.M.P(MD)No.10820 of 2024

03.09.2024

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