Skip to main content

compensation from ESI as well as motor vehicle tribunal

 SHORT NOTE ON LEGAL OPINION

FACT:

Madan Lal’s father, working as labour in the construction industry & has been

insured under Employees State Insurance Act. Unfortunately the father of Madan

Lal died in a motor accident while returning home from the construction site. ESI

act provides compensation for injury during the employment. On the other hand,

the Motor Accident Compensation Tribunal (MACT) act also provide

compensation for motor accidents.

ISSUE:

In which court Madan Lal should file the case for compensation.

OPINION:

Before going into the Madan Lal case I would like to highlight few points in order

to construct my opinion. Firstly I would like to discuss few Supreme Court

Judgement then I will elaborate on insurance policy and acts that provide

compensation to the aggrieved worker.

In the case of Dhropadabai V. M/S Technocraft tooling (2015), Employee died in

the factory premise. Employees dependents approach Labour Court for Workman

Compensation but Labour Court refuses taking a plea that Labour Court does not

have any jurisdiction related to death of an employee during Employment as

Employee insured under ESI Act. Then aggrieved approach High Court &

Supreme Court but no relief provided to them.

In the case of Western India Plywood Ltd. V. Shri P. Ashokan (1997), Employee

lost his one hand and ESI provide Rs 265/month which is not at all satisfactory.

Aggrieved approach High Court & Supreme Court but no relief were provided to

him.

In the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. V. Hamida Khatoon (2009),

Employee come across road accident while returning home from office. The

aggrieved ask for Rs 1,20,000 compensation on the account of the misfortune that

happened to him. Aggrieved approach Labour Court, High Court & Supreme Court

but no relief were provided to him.


The reason behind Courts were not able to provide proper relief to the aggrieved

workers is that workers are insured under ESI Act. ESI Act has few provision that

cause trouble while claiming compensation from courts and tribunal. Section 53 of

ESI Act bars against receiving or recovering of compensation or damages under

any other law. Section 61 of the ESI Act bars benefits under other enactment. ESI

Act bars workers to approach any court or tribunal to get additional benefits which

considered as the adverse effect of ESI Act that violated workers right to claim

compensation.

Employment injuries are often called in dispute as to whether the injury arose out

of employment or not a employment injury. In order resolve the dispute Justice

Denning, UK Court pronounce that if the reasonable nexus establish b/w

Employment & injury, it is considered as a employment injury and injured worker

shall be entitled for compensation. Section 53 (e) was introduced in the ESI Act

which stated that if a worker get injured while traveling from home to office or

vice-versa shall be entitled to get compensation.

In order to make ESI Act more beneficial for those who are insured under the act

we need to make few amendments in the ESI Act. ESI benefits shall be provided

along with additional benefit from the other courts & tribunal to those aggrieved is

entitled for. The employment injury shall be pronounce as injury is general during

course of employment. The aggrieved provided with wide choices to approach

court or tribunal where aggrieved get more benefits. ESI act shall insure workers

under ESI act as well as other acts provided for the benefit to the workers in case

of calamities. There should be no dispute between forum in terms of jurisdiction.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

POONAM VERMA VS. ASHWIN PATEL & ORS (10 MAY, 1996)

     POONAM VERMA VS. ASHWIN PATEL & ORS (10 MAY, 1996) INTRODUCTION The medical profession is perhaps the noblest profession among any remaining professions in India. For a patient, the specialist resembles God. What's more, God is trustworthy. In any case, that is the patient's opinion. As a general rule, doctors are individuals. Furthermore, to fail is human. Doctors might submit a slip-up. Doctors might be careless. The care staff might be imprudent. Two demonstrations of carelessness might bring about a lot more pressing issue. It very well might be because of gross carelessness. The sky is the limit. In such a situation, it is basic to figure out who was careless, and under what conditions. For this situation, the Supreme Court separated carelessness, impulsiveness, and foolishness. An individual is supposed to be a careless individual when he/she unintentionally submits a demonstration of exclusion and disregards a positive obligation that he/she ought to ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur ...
1 comment
Read more

Effects of Non-Registration

 Effects of Non-Registration The Companies Act, 2013 evidently highlights that the main essential for any organization to turn into a company is to get itself registered. A company cannot come into existence until it gets registered. But no such obligation has been imposed for firms by the Indian Partnership Act, 1932. If a firm is not registered it does not cease to be called as a firm, it still exists in the eyes law. Certainly, such a big advantage is not absolute but is subjected to a lot of limitations which we will study further. Non-registration of a firm simply means that the business skips the formalities of incorporation and ceases to exist in the eyes of the law. section 58 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 deals with the procedure of incorporation. Likewise, the meaning of non-registration is the exact opposite of registration, meaning when a firm does not go through the procedure of incorporation or start carrying on activities without getting registered. Effects of ...
Post a Comment
Read more