JITENDER PALIWAL Vs. AJAY MAURYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present appeal filed under Sec. 30(1)(a) of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter, the 'EC Act'), the appellants seek setting aside of order dtd. 29/6/2017 passed by learned Commissioner, Employees' Compensation in Claim No.WC/219/NW/2015/106, whereby the respondent's claim petition seeking injury compensation was allowed and the appellants directed to pay Rs.10,69,008.00 alongwith interest @ 12% p.a. from 28/12/2012 till realization within 30 days of receipt of the order.

(2.) Mr. Rajat Wadhwa, learned counsel for the appellants, contended that the claim petition was filed by the respondent after three years of the incident and the learned Commissioner erred in condoning the delay of 11 months in filing thereof in absence of any sufficient explanation. He further contended that the respondent failed to establish employee-employer relationship between himself and the appellants. Lastly, while drawing attention to Schedule-2 clause (xxxi) of the EC Act, it was contended that since the respondent suffered the alleged accident while working outside a 'building', he is not covered by the definition of 'employee' in terms of Sec. 2(1)(dd) of the EC Act.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, supported the impugned order. It was submitted that in their written statement filed before the learned Commissioner, the appellants had admitted that they organized weekly markets in various sectors of Rohini including Sector-18, wherein the incident in question has occurred.