UNION OF INDIA Vs. DHANUBEN BHANABHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocate Mr. Parikh for the appellants. Perused the record.

(2.) The appellant Union of India has challenged the judgment and award dated 6/5/2011 rendered by the Commissioner under the Employees' Compensation Act and Judge of the Labour Court, Valsad in Workmen's Compensation Fatal Case No. 6/2005. By such award, the Commissioner has awarded Rs. 2,40,122/- with 6% interest from the date of the application being 27/5/2005 and also directed to pay penalty of Rs. 48,024/- for not paying the amount of compensation immediately after the incident, as required under the law.

(3.) If we peruse the impugned judgment, it becomes clear that though the present appellants have filed written statement before the Court, they never bothered to cross-examine the claimant or his witnesses or to examine their witnesses to prove their reply, which is recorded by the Commissioner in para 2 of the impugned judgment, that the deceased was not on duty at the relevant time. Therefore, when the appellants have never bothered to prove their case before the Commissioner, at present only grievance of the appellants is to the effect that though there is pleading in the form of written statement regarding non-involvement of the victim in an accident during course of his duties, the Commissioner should not have awarded any compensation. I do not see any substance in this submission. There is no any rule that every determination should be at length only. The impugned judgment categorically shows that the Commissioner has specifically disclosed that he has examined oral as well as documentary evidence on record, which includes FIR, inquest Panchnama, P M Note and salary slip of the victim to determine that the deceased was serving with the appellants and that claimants are his legal heirs and dependents and that the victim died in an accident during the course of his employment.