ANTHONY LOBO Vs. C.M. MERCHANT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above first appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 raises an interesting point with regard to the effect of Section 110AA of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, which runs as follows:

(2.) THE point which is raised in the appeal is that whereas the persons entitled to compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act are only the legal representatives of the deceased under Section 110A(1)(c), the persons entitled to compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act are not the same as the legal representatives, inasmuch as even the dependents as defined in Section 2(1)(d) can make an application for compensation under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act and the dependents are not merely the legal representatives but also other relatives, including minor brothers or sisters as per Section 2(1)(d) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.

(3.) THE question in the present case is whether Anthony could file the application before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, notwithstanding the award of compensation passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and the provisions contained in Section 110AA of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939.