VARGHESE Vs. THANKAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The substantial question of law; the only issue; for decision in this employer's appeal under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 is as to whether the Commissioner erred in law in applying section 8 of the Act, thereby refusing to act on an agreement under which the dependents of the deceased workman accepted amounts from the employer in settlement of the claim for compensation.

(2.) The learned Counsel for the respondents, who were the claimants before the Commissioner, points out that though the impugned order has been issued by the Commissioner as enjoined by law, as a matter of fact, Ext A2 agreement was entered into and acted upon bona fide and amounts have been deposited in the names of dependents, as deposed by the workman's widow before the Commissioner.

(3.) Sub-Section (1) of section 8 of the Act provides, inter alia, that no payment of compensation in cases of death shall be made otherwise than by deposit with the Commissioner, and no such payment made directly by an employer shall be deemed to be a payment of compensation. However, an employer may make to any dependent advances, on account of compensation, of an amount equal to three months' wages of such workman and so much of such amount, as does not exceed the compensation payable to that dependent, shall be deducted by the Commissioner from such compensation and repaid to the employer. Sub-section (2) of that section provides that any other sum amounting to not less than ten rupees which is payable as compensation may be deposited with the Commissioner on behalf of the person entitled thereto. Thus, statute inhibits any direct payment to the claimants except to the extent of the aforesaid limit and provides that payment of compensation in excess of that limit shall be only by deposit with the Commissioner. That provision is a protective legislation insulating the dependents of workmen who die as a result of employment injuries. Such dependents form a class by themselves and belong to the challenged, vulnerable and weaker sections of the society. The provisions in sections 8(1) and (2) are intended to exclude any situation or opportunity which could be abused against the interest of that marginalised category of the society. Section 8 of the Act, in effect, protects the dependents of a deceased workman against any kind of exploitation or fraud by or on behalf of the employer or any third party, in relation to compensation payable to them under that provision. No payment of compensation, otherwise than by deposit with the Commissioner, in respect of a workman whose injury has resulted in death, is to be recognized, except to the extent provision for such payment is made in section 8 itself and eligible to be reckoned while calculating the total amount payable as compensation under section 8. No employer can plead to have discharged the liability to pay compensation in such cases, without making, deposit before the Commissioner, even if the employer does not dispute the liability and is prepared to pay off the entire amount due to the dependents of the deceased workman in terms of the Act.