2018 (12) TMI 1367 - HC - Indian Laws

Entitlement of Employees Compensation - the deceased died during the course of his employment - death due to casual connection during the course of employment - Held that - Admittedly, in the instant case, there was no accident involving vehicle and therefore the death of Monendra @ Mohindra @ Mohit may have resulted in a liability on the owner but not the insurer - In the instant case, the appellants son was a tanker driver and was engaged to drive the tanker for long distance and it was also proved by the claimants that he had been working under stressful work conditions, that fact having been admitted by the employer, itself/himself. The present appeal is allowed and the matter is remitted to the Commissioner, Employees Compensation, Meerut Region, Meerut to decide the petition/application of the claimants - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Issues Involved:
1. Justification of the Employees' Compensation Commissioner in rejecting the claim petition.
2. Consideration of the death due to casual connection during the course of employment.
3. Ignorance of the casual connection to the death during employment.
4. Rejection of the claim petition despite the death arising out of an accident connected to employment.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Justification of the Employees' Compensation Commissioner in rejecting the claim petition:
The appeal challenged the judgment dated 28th May 2018, where the Commissioner, Employees' Compensation, rejected the claim of the appellants. The claimants argued that the deceased died during the course of his employment, and thus, they were entitled to compensation. The Commissioner, however, concluded that the cause of death was not due to an accident or during the course of employment, leading to the rejection of the claim.

2. Consideration of the death due to casual connection during the course of employment:
The claimants contended that the deceased's death was due to overwork and stressful conditions, which should be considered a casual connection during employment. The Commissioner examined the evidence, including the post-mortem report indicating cardiogenic shock as the cause of death. Despite the father's statement attributing the death to long driving and exertion, the Commissioner did not find sufficient evidence to establish a direct link between the death and employment conditions.

3. Ignorance of the casual connection to the death during employment:
The appellants argued that the Commissioner ignored the casual connection between the deceased's death and his employment. The judgment highlighted that the deceased was engaged in long-distance driving, which involved stress and strain. The Supreme Court's decision in Param Pal Singh vs. National Insurance Company was cited, emphasizing that even internal conditions like heart failure could be considered accidents if they occurred during employment. The court acknowledged the stress and strain of long-distance driving as contributing factors to the death, which the Commissioner overlooked.

4. Rejection of the claim petition despite the death arising out of an accident connected to employment:
The judgment referenced various legal principles and precedents, including the definition of "accident" and the requirement for a causal connection between the injury and employment. It was argued that the deceased's death, though not involving a vehicle accident, was due to the stressful nature of his job. The court concluded that the death was an untoward mishap attributable to the employment conditions, thus qualifying as an accident under the Employees Compensation Act.

Conclusion:
The High Court allowed the appeal, remitting the matter to the Commissioner, Employees' Compensation, Meerut Region, for reconsideration. The Commissioner was directed to complete the proceedings within six months, considering the observations made in the judgment. The court emphasized the need to recognize the causal connection between the deceased's employment and his death, aligning with established legal principles and precedents.

← Previous Next →