RAMJI Vs. LALIT KUMAR BARDIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE deceased workman Shatrughna was employed as a driver on tractor No. CPS 9253, owned by respondent No. 1 (the employer) and insured against accident by the insurance Company (respondent No. 2 ). In the course of his employment, the tractor turned in the field and the workman Shatrughna died on July 4, 1981 having been crushed under the tractor. It is not in dispute that he was employed on fixed wages of Rs. 140/- per month.

(2.) THE appellants, who are parents of the deceased, approached the Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation under Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (in short 'the Act'), claiming compensation for the death of the workman. The Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation, by the impugned order dated January 31, 1983 rejected the claim filed by the parents, holding that since the deceased workman was never paid any salary by the employer during the whole period of his employment and he having received support from his parents, the parents cannot claim to be falling within the definition of 'dependents' defined under Section 2 (1) (d) (iii) (b), of the Act.

(3.) THE learned Counsel appearing for the claimants in this appeal placed heavy reliance on the decision of Gauhati High Court in the case of Union of India v. Santi Bala Devi and others, 1988 (1) ACJ 274, particularly the interpretation placed on the above defintiion clause in a claim of a similar nature as reproduced below:-