KUNHIPATHUMMA Vs. DIVISIONAL PERSONAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is purported to be an application under S.151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for impleading the petitioners, who are stated to be the legal representatives of the applicant in W.C. No. 58 of 1982 before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Kozhikode, the said applicant having died on 21-5-1983 after the order against which the appeal is sought to be filed, was passed. The office expressed doubt regarding the maintainability of the application under S.151 CPC. for impleading the petitioners in the appeal sought to be filed.

(2.) We do not think that an application in the nature of the one which is before us is contemplated for the purpose of filing an appeal against the order of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation under S 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (the Act). The term workman as defined in S.2(n) of the Act reads as follows:

(3.) This inclusive definition of the term 'workman' in the Act clearly indicates that the right of the dependants to pursue the proceedings instituted by the workman survives him, and, therefore, in their own right they are entitled to institute the appeal. There is neither the need nor the scope for an application for impleading the dependants as a step precedent to the filing of the appeal. The right of the petitioners to file the appeal flows from the original order itself as they automatically step into the shoes of the workman on his death by virtue of the inclusive definition contained in S.2(n) of the Act to which reference has already been made.