PURANMAL Vs. GEETARANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE claimant Sri Puranmal who is the father of the deceased workman, has filed this appeal challenging the award dated 16.07.2009 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen 's Compensation, Sambalpur, in W.C. Case No. 26 of 2005, awarding compensation of Rs. 4,11,900 / - and directing apportionment of the same between the appellant, widow wife and minor son of the deceased workman.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the claimant -appellant submits that the Commissioner erred in apportioning the compensation amount amongst the dependents of the deceased workman, including the widow wife, inasmuch as, she had already accepted her marriage articles and permanent alimony and was therefore not entitled to any compensation, as the widow wife of the deceased workman. In this regard, it is submitted that as Mukeshpal Singh (deceased workman) had entered into an agreement dated 17.10.2003 with Smt. Geetarani (the wife) wherein it was agreed that she would not claim any moveable and Immovable property in future from her husband (deceased workman), after receipt of Rs. 3,10,000/ - as permanent alimony, learned Tribunal erred in not considering the same while passing the impugned award and directing apportionment of the compensation amount amongst the widow wife, minor son and father of the deceased workman. It is further submitted that the Commissioner has not considered the order passed by the Addl. District Judge, Delhi, in H.M.A. Case No. 916 of 2003, wherein it had been mentioned that receipt of Rs. 3,10,000/ - as permanent alimony, the claimant shall not make any claim over the moveable and immovable property of the husband (deceased workman) and also undertook not to make any claim regarding Stridhan articles. Accordingly, it is submitted that the apportionment of the compensation amount by the learned Tribunal is improper and illegal.

(3.) THE Commissioner, on the basis of its aforesaid findings, has come to hold that the widow wife, minor son and the father of the deceased workman are entitled to the compensation amount payable and has accordingly apportioned the same in the following manner: