LAWS(DLH)-2017-5-340

ADESH JAIN & ORS. Vs. TOP SINGH

Decided On May 02, 2017
Adesh Jain And Ors. Appellant
V/S
TOP SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C.M. No. 16713/2017 (delay) For the reasons stated in the application, delay in filing the appeal is condoned. CM stands disposed of. C.M. No. 16714/2017 (exemption) Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. CM stands disposed of. FAO No. 205/2017 & CM No. 16712/2017 (stay) 1. This first appeal is filed under Section 30 of the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 impugning the judgment of the Employee's Compensation Commissioner allowing the claim petition filed by the respondent herein. Claim petition was filed by the respondent on account of his suffering injury due to electrocution while working at the site.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the respondent filed the claim petition pleading that he was an employee of appellant nos. 2 and 3, and who were awarded a contract for doing POP work at the site of the appellant no.1. Respondent pleaded that he was working as a helper for doing POP work of appellant nos. 2 and 3 since 21.7.2015 on wages of Rs. 200/- per day. On 25.7.2015 respondent suffered injury due to electrocution while working at the site 641-C, Loni Road, Ram Nagar, Delhi. He was taken to the GTB Hospital by co-workers. Since appellant nos. 2 and 3 failed to pay the compensation in spite of demand notice dated 30.5.2016, the claim petition was hence filed.

(3.) Appellants no. 1 to 3 were the respondent nos. 1 to 3 in the claim petition filed before the Employee's Compensation Commissioner. Appellant nos. 2 and 3 were the employers of the claimant, respondent herein. It is curious that all the appellants filed a common written statement i.e owner of the site and contractors filed a common written statement. It was denied that there was a relationship of employer and employee between the respondent herein and the appellant nos. 2 and 3. It was also pleaded by the appellants that due to humanitarian grounds appellants nos. 2 and 3 extended help of Rs. 25,000/- to Rs. 30,000/- for treatment of the respondent herein. Accordingly, they prayed for the claim petition to be dismissed.