ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. UTTAM CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal was taken up for final disposal today. It was not admitted on any substantial question of law but the order of the admission states that the appeal raised important substantial questions of law. In that event, it would be in the fitness of things, if it is admitted for final disposal. Two grounds have been submitted with the appeal which requires consideration. First question need not detain this Court as it has already been settled in Sita Ram versus Satvinder Singh & Another, Latest HLJ (HP) 1110. On the second question, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the insurance policy does not cover the risk as claimed for the reasons that the first respondent/petitioner/claimant was not an employee of the second respondent Sudesh Chandel and he submits that according to the evidence on record more especially that of respondent No. 2 as also of the documents purportedly those of S.S. Construction Company, the petitioner/claimant at the relevant time was under the direct control of S.S. Construction Company. Reliance has been placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in Zila Sahakari Kendrya Bank Maryadit versus Shahjadi Begum and others, 2006 11 SCC 692where considering the definition of employer under Section 2(1)(e) of the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923, the Supreme Court holds:

(2.) Aside from the fact I do not find ample pleadings on this point. I find that this S.S. Construction Company has not been impleaded as party respondent in the petition. Surely in order to ascertain as to whether the deceased was covered by Section 2(1)(e) of the Act, S.S. construction Company through its proprietors/partners was a necessary party and ample opportunity to implead it as party respondent before the Commissioner should and ought to have been given but no such exercise has been taken.

(3.) In these circumstances, this case is remanded to the Commissioner under the Workmen Compensation Act, Sunder Nagar with this direction that S.S. Construction Company, Village Kansa Chowk, P. O. Dhaban, District Mandi ( H.P.) through its proprietors or partners be impleaded as party respondent before it and it will be given an opportunity to file reply to the claim petition and thereafter the case will proceed further. The parties to this petition will be at liberty to lead evidence as to whether on the date of accident/occurrence petitioner/claimant Uttam Chand was the employee of the second respondent Sudesh Kumar or S.S. Construction Company. There will be no evidence on the quantification etc. Records be sent back forthwith to the learned trial Court. Parties are directed to appear before the learned Commissioner under the Workmen Compensation Act, Sundernagar on 2nd November, 2012. Appeal stands disposed of. No order as to the costs. All pending applications also stand disposed of.