ZAIBUNNISSA Vs. SOUTHERN RAILWAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 4 June 1962, Hussainsab Doddamani, who was a brakesman in the Southern Railway, was involved in a railway accident between Kundgol and Saunshi stations and died. The Divisional Superintendent, Southern Railway, Hubli, deposited a sum of Rs. 3,500 in the Court of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation; Dharwar, for payment of compensation to the dependents of the deceased Hussainsab. The appellant before us, who is the widow of Hussainsab, submitted her claim before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation both on her own behalf as well as on behalf of her children in January 1963.

(2.) But there was also a claim made by the widow for payment of compensation under S. 82A of the Indian Railways Act in the Court of the ex-officio Claims Commissioner and Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dharwar, who made an order on February 16, 1963, that the railway administration should pay the compensation of a sum of Rs. 8,000 to the widow of the deceased Hussainsab. It is seen from the order made by the ex-officio Claims Commissioner that the widow of the deceased produced a statement before him that she elected to claim compensation under the Indian Railways Act in preference to the compensation claimable under the Workmen's Compensation Act in case it was held that she could not claim compensation under both the laws.

(3.) After the adjudication made by the Claims Commissioner, the railway administration sought a refund of the sum of Rs. 3,500 which had been deposited by the administration before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation. That application was opposed by the applicant on the ground that it was possible for her to claim compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, in addition to the compensation which she had already recovered under S. 82A of the Indian Railways Act. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Dharwar, repelled that contention, and not only disallowed the appellant's claim for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act but also directed the refund to the administration of the amount which had been deposited before him.