LAWS(J&K)-2026-5-12

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. MOHD. ALAM

Decided On May 07, 2026
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Appellant
V/S
Mohd. Alam Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the award dtd. 27/2/2004, passed by the Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act, Jammu (Assistant Labour Commissioner), in File No. 06/WCA/2001 titled "Mohd. Alam & Ors. v. Chowdhary Mohd. Sarour Hussain & Ors." By the said award, compensation amounting to Rs.2,19,950.00, along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of accident till actual deposit, has been awarded in favour of the claimants (respondents herein).

(2.) Briefly stated the facts arising in this appeal; that the claimants filed an application under Workmen's Compensation Act on 16/1/2001 before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Jammu seeking compensation on account of death of Maqbool Hussain, who was working as a driver for respondent No. 8. Maqbool Hussain was driving vehicle No. 6838/UGA when it met with an accident near Baroli on ChassanaGulabpuraBudhal Road on 23/6/2000. The vehicle fell into a nallah resulting in the death of the deceased-Maqbool Hussain. The respondents claimed compensation by filing a claim petition under Workmen's Compensation Act on the ground that the deceased, who was driver and earning Rs.4,500.00 per month, died during the course of his employment.

(3.) The Assistant Labour Commissioner, upon receipt of the claim application, issued notice to the other side, however, despite service of summons besides notice through publication in newspaper, respondent No. 8 did not appear, resulting in ex-parte proceedings being initiated against him. The appellant/Insurance Company appeared before the Assistant Labour Commissioner and objected to the application on the ground that the accident has taken place within the jurisdiction of Police Station Mahore, and the respondents are the residents of Surankote, as such, the Assistant Labour Commissioner lacked jurisdiction to decide the application. It was also submitted stated that the applicant was not a workman as defined under the Act. Statements of the witnesses were recorded and after recording the statements, evidence were closed.