BABHUBHAI MAGANBHAI PATANWADIA Vs. REGIONAL DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heirs and legal representatives of deceased Babubhai Maganbhai Patanwadia have filed First Appeal against the judgment and award dated January 8, 2002 passed by the Employees' State Insurance (hereinafter referred to as E.S.I.) Court in Second Appeal No. 16 of 1999. The E.S.I. Court has held that when deceased Babubhai Maganbhai Patanwadia was working with Alembic Glass he was suffering from the disease of Silicosis and that the deceased had 60% disability.

(2.) The facts giving rise to these appeals are as under: The learned counsel for the original appellant late Shri Babubhai Maganbhai Patanwadia submits that the appellant was serving in Alembic Glass Industries Limited, Vadodara since more than 10 years. In view of his employment he suffered an ailment of Silicosis. The original appellant was examined by the Medical Board on March 12, 1986. The Medical Board awarded 10% disability. The appellant has produced copy of the order passed by the Medical Board at Annexure-A to the appeal. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order, the appellant filed appeal before the Medical Appellate Tribunal being Appeal (MAT) No. 10/1994. The Medical Appellate Tribunal by its judgment and order dated September 15, 1995 partly allowed the appeal and held that the appellant had disability of 30%. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order, the deceased Babubhai Maganbhai Patanwadia filed ESI Second Appeal No. 16 of 1999 before the ESI Court, Vadodara. ESI Court, Vadodara, by its judgment and order dated January 8, 2002 partly allowed the appeal and held that the deceased Babubhai Maganbhai Patanwadia has 60% permanent disability from January 1, 1990 and he has been given all benefits upto October 25, 1998 and thereafter all the benefits were given to his heirs and legal representatives. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid order of the ESI Court, Babubhai Maganbhai Patanwadia has filed the present appeal under Section 82 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 before this Court on February 27, 2002.

(3.) Mr. S.H. Iyer, learned counsel for the appellant, has invited my attention to Rule 57 of the Employees' State Insurance (Central) Rules, 1950 which provides disablement benefits. The relevant provisions of the said Rule read as under: