PROPRIETOR Vs. MARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short the 'Act'). Notice was ordered for the respondent and she is represented.

(2.) BY taking consent of the learned Advocates, the appeal is heard on its merits and the following order is passed.

(3.) THE appellant has questioned the order of the Commissioner on several grounds. Initially it is the case of the appellant that the application for claim being preferred after the period of limitation the Commissioner ought not to have entertained the application; the second ground of the appellant is that the deceased Doraswamy was not a workman in the estate and the finding of the Commissioner on this question requires to be interfered with; the third ground urged by the appellant is that the present respondent is not entitled to the compensation for the personal injuries sustained by her husband under the maxim "Actio Personalis Moritur Cum Persona". With regard to the first ground under Section 10 Sub-clause (1) the claim shall be preferred within two years of the occurrence of the accident in case of injury and two years from the date of the death if the person died due to the employment injury. THE Act also provide for the Commissioner to condone the delay in preferring the claim petitions beyond the period prescribed under the statute. THE proviso thus provides that the Commissioner may entertain and decide any claim for compensation in any case not withstanding that the notice is not preferred in due time as provided in its Sub-section, if he is satisfied that the failure to give notice or to prefer the claim, as the case may be, presents a sufficient cause.