BANSIDHARA BEHERA Vs. MAHADEI SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since all the appeals indicated hereinabove arise out of a common judgment dated 12.09.2013 involving W.C. Case Nos.4 of 2010 and 5 of 2010 passed by the Commissioner for Employees Compensation, Berhampur, Ganjam and require a common hearing and disposal, the same are taken up together for hearing and disposed of vide this common judgment. It be mentioned here that FAO Nos.432 & 433 of 2013 are at the instance of the owner, whereas FAO Nos.482 & 483 of 2013 are at the instance of the claimants involving same judgment.

(2.) Undisputed fact remains that the claimants being the wives of deceased persons involving W.C. Case Nos.4 of 2010 and 5 of 2010. On the premises of death of their husbands on drowning of a boat, in which, both the deceased persons were alleged to have moving on the direction of alleged employer/opposite party to attend the work. Involving the death for drowning of the boat, making out a case of employeremployee relationship and that the death has arisen in course and out of employment, W.C. cases were filed seeking appropriate compensation. There appears there is contest in between all these parties.

(3.) Assailing the impugned judgment on behalf of owner, Sri Das, learned Senior Counsel however taking this Court to the discussion and findings on Issue No.1 submitted that for there was statement of opposite party involving both the cases that there is no master and servant relationship, the accident cannot have any attachment to the opposite party in the proceeding before Commissioner. It is alleged that the Commissioner, however, taking into account 161 statement involving criminal case in involvement of same incident, has come to opine that there is employer-employee relationship and the accident has also a link in course of work and arising out of work. It is alleged that it is in the above wrong finding on the basis of 161 statement, the Commissioner has also come to hold that the claimant's involving both proceedings are entitled to a sum of Rs.1,23,360/- and 1,39,312/- respectively by way of compensation, which required to be paid by owners/appellants.