IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.PADMANABHAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 17TH JANUARY 2008 / 27TH POUSHA 1929 MFA.No. 170 of 2002() --------------------- WCC.73/1990 of COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION (DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER),ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT: APPLICANT IN WCC.73/90 --------------------------------- MR.M.SATHYAN, S/O.SRI.MADHAVAN, MADATHIL PARAMBIL HOUSE, PANANGAD. KUMBALAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.RADHAKRISHNAN SMT.K.L. SREEDEVI RESPONDENTS: OPPOSITE PARTIES IN WCC ------------------------------------ 1. MR.P.V.VIMAL KUMAR, G 182, GIRINAGAR, ERNAKULAM , KOCHI-20. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., JASMINE BUILDING, NO.XI/349, A.M. ROAD, PERUMBAVOOR. 3. THE COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SMT.PREETHI KARUNAKARAN SRI.P.S.DIVAKARAN SMT.C.S.ANUROOPA SRI.S.MAMMU THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. PADMANABHAN NAIR ,J. ------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.No.170 of 2002 ------------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 17th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner in W.C.C.No.73/1990 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation(Deputy Labour Commissioner), Ernakulam is the appellant. Appellant filed a petition claiming compensation impleading respondents 1 and 2 as W.C.C.No.73/1990 alleging that on 8.12.1988 he sustained an employment injury. The case of the appellant was that he was appointed as a driver of the lorry bearing registration No.KDE 646 from Ernakulam to Selam and it met with an accident at Pillakadamedu near Selam and appellant sustained injuries. He claimed an amount of Rs.98,530/- as compensation. According to the appellant he was getting a salary of Rs.1,500/- and was aged 37 years at the time of accident. The Deputy Labour Commissioner awarded an amount of Rs.19,214/-. Aggrieved by the order of the Deputy Labour Commissioner the petitioner himself filed M.F.A.No.781/1992 before this Court. The main challenge in the appeal was that the quantum of compensation awarded was too meagre. Before this Court he made a request that an opportunity may be given to him to get himself examined by a medical board. Accordingly this Court disposed of the appeal on 16.3.2001 with a direction that the appellant shall get himself examined by a medical board and produce the disability certificate. After remand the appellant appeared before the Deputy Labour Commissioner. Appellant filed a petition to MFA No.170/2002 2 refer the him to medical board. That petition was allowed and the appellant was referred to medical board. Medical board sent a report to the court below stating that though the board issued a direction to the appellant to appear before the medical board on 23.8.2001 he failed to appear. On receipt of such a report the Deputy Labour Commissioner found that the appellant was not entitled to get any more amount as compensation. Challenging that order this appeal is filed. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has argued that the appellant could not appear before the medical board as he did not receive any notice from the medical board. It is argued that on 10.10.2001 the appellant made a request before the Deputy Labour Commissioner to give him another opportunity to appear before the medical board. But that prayer was rejected and the matter was closed. 3. Appellant disputes the report sent by the medical board that he failed to appear. According to the appellant the medical board did not issue any notice. The Deputy Labour Commissioner ought to have either given another opportunity to the appellant to appear before the medical board. Considering all aspects of the matter I am of the view that it is only just and proper to give the appellant another opportunity to get himself examined by a medical board. For that purpose the case has to go back. In the result, appeal is allowed. The impugned order passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner is hereby set aside. The order, if any, passed by the Deputy MFA No.170/2002 3 Labour Commissioner closing the petition filed by the appellant for referring him to medical board is also stand set aside. Case is remanded. Deputy Labour Commissioner is directed to take W.C.C.No.73/1990 back to file and dispose of the same afresh after giving a reasonable opportunity to the appellant to get himself examined by a medical board. K. PADMANABHAN NAIR, JUDGE. cks MFA No.170/2002 4 K.PADMANABHAN NAIR, J. M.F.A.No.170 of 2002 JUDGMENT 17th January, 2008.