H.P. FINANCIAL CORPORATION Vs. SDO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE grievance of the writ petitioner, i.e. the H.P. Financial Corporation, is against the order of Commissioner under Workmen's Compensation Act, whereby it has been directed to make payment of compensation awarded to an employee of respondent No.2, under the Workmen's Compensation Act.

(2.) RELEVANT facts may be noticed. Respondent No.2 took a loan from the writ petitioner for establishment of its industrial unit by mortgaging the site of the industrial unit and pledging the assets of the unit. Respondent No.2 defaulted in repaying the loan. The writ petitioner, in exercise of the right, under sub section (1) of Section 29 of the State Financial Corporations Act, hereafter called the Act, took over the possession of the mortgaged property as also the pledged assets. This was done in the year 1995. Respondent No.4, a workman of respondent No.2, sustained injury in the course of his employment and applied for compensation to the Commissioner, under Workmen's Compensation Act, sometime in the year 1987. The matter was decided in the year 1996 and certain amount of compensation was ordered to be paid to respondent No.4 by respondent No.2. When the compensation money was not paid, Execution Petition was filed by respondent No.4 against respondent No.2. It appears that respondent No.2 took the plea that the possession of the unit and the assets having been taken over by the writ petitioner, the compensation money was liable to be paid by the writ petitioner. An application was moved for impleading the writ petitioner as party, in view of the provisions of sub section (5) of Section 29 of the Act. That application was allowed. Thereafter, an order was passed by the Commissioner under Workmen's Compensation Act directing the writ petitioner to pay the compensation money, together with penalty, costs, etc.

(3.) WE find no merit in any of the aforesaid submissions.