AIR INDIA CHARTERS LTD. Vs. TANJA GLUSICA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is at the instance of original Respondents in Application (WCA) No. 336/B-65/2013 filed by the legal heirs of deceased pilot Zlatko Glusica under Sec. 22 read with Ss. 3, 4, 4A and 10 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 [for short "EC Act"].

(2.) The Respondents are Serbian nationals and the family members and dependents of deceased Zlatko Glusica, who was working as pilot with the Appellant-Company and expired while on duty on 22/5/2010 in an unfortunate accident which occurred at Mangalore. On 27/9/2012 the Appellant-Company deposited with the office of Labour Commissioner (Workmen's Compensation) sum of Rs.3,32,15,589.00 along with relevant Form "A" prescribed under Rule 6(1) of Employees Compensation Act, 1923.

(3.) From the record it appears that the application under Sec. 22 of Employees' Compensation Act, 1923 was filed on 11/10/2012. The Appellant filed their reply dtd. 4/5/2013 to the said application. The application filed on 11/10/2012 was not pressed and subsequently on 3/7/2013 another application was filed by the Respondents claiming compensation amount of USD 745580, maximum penalty of 50% and maximum interest of 12%. The contentions raised was that the deceased was in employment with the Appellant-Company through a contract executed by the Appellant-Company with one Sigmar Aviation Ltd. The services of deceased were made available to the Appellant-Company and the deceased was working under the direct supervision of Appellant-Company. The Appellant-Company had declared that the salary paid to the contractor, i.e., Sigmar Aviation Ltd was USD 11,000 per month and the Respondents were not aware as to what the actual salary was paid by the contractor to the deceased. The salary of the deceased is deemed to be USD 11,000 per month and the relevant multiplier is 135.56. The Respondents filed the claim through their constituted attorney pleading difficulty in coming to India. The Respondents, after meeting the Constituted Attorney became aware of their rights and through the Constituted Attorney lodged a claim with the Appellant-Company by e-mail on 21/5/2012. There was no payment of interim compensation and no deposit by the Appellant Company even after 2 years of accident.