LAWS(HPH)-2003-6-7

HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE FOREST Vs. MEHAR CHAND

Decided On June 11, 2003
Himachal Pradesh State Forest Appellant
V/S
MEHAR CHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ONE Nek Ram of about 20 years of age, son of respondent No. 1 Mehar Chand had died during the course of his employment with respondent No. 2 Jai Singh who was working on behalf of appellant H.P. State Forest Corporation in Tehsil Jwali, District Kangra. Respondent No. 1 approached the Commissioner under Workmen's Compensation Act (for short 'the Act') for the grant of compensation in respect of his deceased son. According to respondent No. 1, as per the claim laid by him before the Commissioner under the Act his son Nek Ram had died while in active employment of the respondent No. 2 Jai Singh and the appellant H.P. State Forest Corporation. The deceased is alleged to have sustained injuries as a result of fall of pine tree on his person while he was working in the Forest. Compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000 was demanded. The respondent No. 2 Jai Singh the contractor did not put in appearance before the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation. The appellant, H.P. Forest Corporation while resisting the claim admitted that the deceased was working in the forest and that he was engaged by respondent No. 2 Jai Singh. Appellant denied its liability and pleaded that respondent No. 2 Jai Singh being the actual employer of the deceased was liable under the law.

(2.) COMMISSIONER , Workmen's Compensation on 21.4.1997 made his award whereby he allowed the compensation of Rs. 80,640 in favour of respondent No. 1 under Section 4 of the Act. The liability to pay the amount of compensation was fixed against the appellant, H.P. State Forest Corporation.

(3.) DURING the course of hearing while not disputing the quantum of compensation awarded in favour of respondent No. 1 by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation only point raised on behalf of the appellant before this Court was to the effect that under Sub section (2) of Section 12 of the Act, though the appellant as principal employer is liable to pay the amount of compensation, it is to be indemnified by respondent No. 2 the contractor being the actual employer of the deceased.