FA/2776/2008 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 2776 of 2008 With CIVIL APPLICATION No. 7222 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI : ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION - Appellant(s) Versus KHATIJABEN ISMAIL & 1 - Defendant(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR SACHIN D VASAVADA for Appellant(s) : 1, None for Defendant(s) : 1, MS PARUL P VASAVADA for Defendant(s) : 2, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 08/07/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT FA/2776/2008 2/4 JUDGMENT 1.0 This appeal arises out of the judgment and decree passed by the learned Judge, E.S.I. Court No. 1, Rajkot in E.S.I. Application No. 14 of 1990 dated 22.01.2008 whereby, the said application was allowed. 2.0 The facts in brief leading rise to the filing of the present appeal are as under; 2.1 The deceased husband of opponent no. 1 herein was an employee of opponent no. 2 – Company. On 27.05.1988, during the course of employment, the deceased husband of opponent no. 1 sustained severe injuries on his left legs. Therefore, he was admitted in the Hospital as an indoor patient. However, on 03.06.1988, he succumbed to the injuries during the course of treatment. 2.2 As the opponent no. 2 – Company was governed by the provisions of the E.S.I. Act, 1948, the wife of the deceased, i.e. opponent no. 1 herein, filed an application being E.S.I. Application No. 14 of 1990 claiming dependency benefits. 2.3 The E.S.I. Court, after hearing both the sides and after considering the evidence adduced FA/2776/2008 3/4 JUDGMENT by the parties, allowed the application of opponent no. 1. Hence, this appeal. 3.0 Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents on record. It is not in dispute that at the time when the deceased employee was admitted in the Hospital as an indoor patient, he was suffering from Diabetes and Blood Pressure variations. In such circumstance, necessary precautionary measures were required to be taken by the Doctor who was in the panel of the appellant – Corporation if the deceased employee was to be operated upon. However, from the record, it appears that the Doctor concerned was not vigilant and had not taken necessary precaution while operating the deceased workman, as a result of which the workmen succumbed to the injuries which were sustained during the course of employment. 4.0 Looking to the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that the Court below was completely justified in allowing the application of opponent no. 1. I am in complete agreement with the reasonings given by and the findings arrived at by the Court below and hence, find no reasons to interfere in this Appeal. 5.0 For the foregoing reasons, the Appeal FA/2776/2008 4/4 JUDGMENT stands dismissed. The incident in question is of the year 1988 and therefore, the appellant – Corporation is directed to make all the payments to opponent no. 1 on or before 01.09.2008 and produce the receipt thereof on record of this Court on or before 02.09.2008. If the aforesaid direction issued by this Court is not complied with, then Contempt Notice be issued against the appellant. Office is directed to send the writ of this order to the Regional Director of E.S.I. forthwith. No order as to costs. [K. S. JHAVERI, J.] ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATION As the main matter has been disposed of, the civil application shall not survive. It stands disposed of accordingly. [K. S. JHAVERI, J.] Pravin/*