ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. SRIMATI S SAWANT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed under section 30 of the Workmens Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act"), taking exception to the order passed by the Commissioner, Workmens Compensation dated 26th June, 2000.

(2.) THIS First Appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company. The appellant has assailed the order mainly on the ground that it was not liable to pay compensation under the provisions of the said Act. Whereas, the original complainant, respondent No. 1 in the first appeal has filed the above numbered cross objection praying for awarding interest and penalty under section 4-A of the said Act.

(3.) THE events giving rise to the filing of these proceedings are that : the respondent No. 1 filed an application dated 26th June, 1987 before the Commissioner of Workmens Compensation, Government of Goa, claiming compensation from respondent No. 2. M/s. Aquarius Pvt. Ltd. , contending that her husband Shripad V. Sawant met with fatal accident in the course of and arising out of employment on the barge of respondent No. 2 on 5-8-1985. According to respondent No. 1, her husband died on the barge on 4-8-1985 and his body was recovered on 5-8-1985, for which she claimed an amount of Rs. 30,000/- as compensation. During the pendency of the said application, sometime on 27-6-1991, respondent No. 1 moved an application praying that the appellant herein be joined as opposite party to the proceedings, as according to the respondent No. 1, the insurance company was also liable to pay compensation. Notice was issued on the said application to the appellant; and pursuant to the notice, the appellant filed written statement before the Commissioner on 24-2-1992. The appellant in its written statement contended that the application filed by respondent No. 1 herein was bad in law and not maintainable and that the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to entertain the same as there was no accident nor the death was caused arising out of employment. In so far as respondent No. 2 is concerned, in its reply, it took a stand that it was not liable to pay compensation as death was not on account of accident. According to the appellant as well as respondent No. 2, the death was caused due to heart attack and was a natural death for which no compensation need be paid under the provisions of the said Act. In other words, both the appellant as well as respondent No. 2 denied their liability to pay the compensation. Respondent No. 2 further contended that in any case the liability to pay compensation would be that of the appellant Insurance Company and that the stand taken by the Insurance Company be, therefore, rejected. Respondent No. 2 also contended that they have paid a sum of Rs. 6,000/- to respondent No. 1 and the said amount be deducted from the sum to be determined by the Court.