LawFinder.news
LawFinder.news

Gauhati High Court Enhances Compensation for Deceased Driver's Family

LAW FINDER NEWS NETWORK |
Gauhati High Court Enhances Compensation for Deceased Driver's Family

Court Finds Initial Judgment Perversely Ignored Admitted Salary Evidence


In a significant ruling, the Gauhati High Court has revised the compensation awarded to the family of a deceased driver, Haraj Ali, acknowledging an oversight in the original judgment by the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, Barpeta. The court, presided by Justice Mridul Kumar Kalita, found that the Commissioner had ignored clear evidence regarding the salary of the deceased, resulting in a perverse judgment that undervalued the compensation due to the appellants.


The case arose from the tragic death of Haraj Ali, who was employed as a driver by Rafiqul Mandal and was earning a monthly salary of Rs. 8,000 as admitted by the employer. However, the initial judgment by the Commissioner had erroneously fixed the monthly salary at Rs. 5,500, ignoring the salary certificate and the owner's admission of the actual salary.


The court's decision emphasized the importance of basing judgments on relevant and admitted evidence. Justice Kalita noted that the Commissioner, by overlooking the owner's admission and the salary certificate, had committed an act of perversity. The court recalculated the compensation based on the admitted monthly salary of Rs. 8,000, increasing the total compensation to Rs. 8,43,680, inclusive of funeral expenses.


Furthermore, the court directed the Oriental Insurance Company to deposit the revised compensation amount within four weeks, ensuring the family of the deceased receives the financial relief they rightfully deserve. This ruling underscores the judiciary's role in ensuring fair compensation based on factual and admitted evidence, setting a precedent for similar cases in the future.


Bottom line:-

Employees' Compensation Act, 1923 - Calculation of compensation must consider admitted facts regarding salary - Ignoring relevant evidence amounts to perversity in the judgment.


Statutory provision(s): Employees' Compensation Act, 1923 Section 30, Employees' Compensation Act, 1923 Section 4(4), Employees' Compensation Act, 1923 Section 30


Nasima Khatun v. Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., (Gauhati) : Law Finder Doc id # 2943660

Share this article: