SAKET GUPTA Vs. IMRANA KHATOON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This first appeal under Sec. 30 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 challenges the judgment of the Employees Compensation Commissioner awarding the claim/compensation to the respondents herein, and who were the claimants before the Employees Compensation Commissioner, on account of the death of one Mohd. Yameen. The respondents herein are the legal heirs of deceased Mohd. Yameen.

(2.) The impugned judgment dated 18.11.2015 shows that the appellant had taken the objection that the deceased Mohd. Yameen was in fact an employee of M/s Gupta Traders which is a sole proprietary concern, not of the appellant, but of the father of the appellant Sh. Vijay Prakash Gupta. The firm of M/s Gupta Traders; sole proprietor Mr. Vijay Prakash Gupta is duly registered under the Employees State Insurance Corporation Act, 1948 (in short 'ESIC Act') as per Code No. 10000357760001001 with effect from 200 Accordingly, it was contended on behalf of the appellant that the respondents will have to take their benefit not under the Employees Compensation Act but under the ESIC Act in view of Sec. 53 of the ESIC Act. Sec. 53 of the ESIC Act contains a bar to the grant of compensation under the Employees Compensation Act in case the employee is covered under the ESIC Act.

(3.) ESIC was noticed by the Employee's Compensation Commissioner and since ESIC denied its liability, hence the Employee's Compensation Commissioner allowed the claim petition under the Employee's Compensation Act.