SARASWATI DEVI Vs. BINAPANI MAHATANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises, out of a proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, (Act 8 of 1923), as amended, by Act 8 of 1959, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) under Section 30(1)(c) of the Act, from the order dated 21-7-1965 of the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ran-chi. The widowed mother of the deceased workman, Phanindra Nath Mahto, is the appellant in this appeal. She is aggrieved by the order of the Labour Court holding that she being the widowed mother of the deceased did not come within the word "dependant" as defined in Section 2(1)(d)(i) of the Act, and, therefore, the compensation money has been apportioned between the widow, respondent No. 1, and the minor daughter, respondent No. 2, only, giving each of the two half of the compensation money of Rs. 10,000 deposited by the Management.

(2.) The facts are very simple and they are these: On 9-3-1965, Phanindra Nath Mahto, the deceased workman, who was working in Tisco, died by accident. The Tisco deposited Rs. 10,000 as compensation to be paid to the dependants of the deceased. There claimants, namely, the widow of the deceased, Binapani Mahatani, respondent No. 1, the minor daughter of the deceased workman by respondent No. 1, Jayanti alias Sandhya Mahatani, respondent No. 2, and the widowed mother, Saraswati Devi, the appellant, filed claim to get the compensation money The Labour Court, as stated above, decided that the widowed mother, the appellant, was not entitled to the compensation, and, therefore, he held that the widow, respondent No. 1, will be entitled to withdraw Rs. 5,000 for herself out of the compensation money and the other half of Rs 5,000 should remain in deposit so that out of this amount the marriage of the daughter may be solemnised and accordingly he further directed that a Postal Savings Bank Account should be opened in the name of the minor unmarried daughter to be released on the occasion of her marriage in favour of her legal guardian, The widowed mother has, therefore, come up in appeal being aggrieved bv the aforesaid order rejecting her claim.

(3.) It appears that the widow of the deceased, respondent No. 1, filed her claim on 14-5-1964 and in paragraph 4 of the said claim petition she said that the widowed mother, the appellant, was not dependant on the deceased, as she lived with Shri Sashadhar Mahto, the elder brother of the deceased and has also got a decent income from cultivation and other sources. The appellant, however, in her claim petition filed on 12-6-1964 said that according to her caste custom the widow of the deceased is eligible for remarriage, and, therefore, there is every apprehension that drawing the compensation money she will remarry and go away She further stated in paragraph 3 of her petition that with the death of her son, the deceased, she has been brought to a point of starvation. She also said in the application that she used to be maintained out of the income of the deceased and the deceased used to live jointly with his brother Sasadhar.