'^•la.'^S ®E>gf '^j^ ^ai; "..' (.-r..^ APPELLANT IN THE HON'BLE HIGH^OURLOF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR M.A.(C)No.- ^4/2009 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, THROUGH DIVISIONAL MANAGER, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, MALVIYA NAGAR, DURG Vrs. THAKUR RESPONDENTS M3^<%^ •h. ^u l^ :-1. KHEMANLAL THAKUR S/0 I.ATE -c-» PAHRURAM THAKUR, CASTE - GOND, AGE ABOUT 40 YRS., RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - NARAGAON, POST - NARAGAON,THANA - GURUR, TAH. - GURUR, DISTRICT - DURG (CHHATTISGARH) RESPONDENTS/NON-APPLICANTS :- 2. ASHISH KUMAR AGRAWAL S/0 NANDKISHORE AGRAWAL, RESIDENT OF GUJRATI COLONY, DHAMTARI (C.G.) MANAGER, HARI OM RICE MILL DHAMTARI, HARI OM DHANKUTAI KENDRA, INDUSTRIAL WARD, DHAMTARI, TAH. + DISTT.-DURG RISHI BAI THAKURAGE ABOUT 35 YRS. FATHER HEERALAL THAKUR, CASTE- GOND, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- KHARRA, POST- DARRA, TAH.- GURUR, DISTRICT - DURG APPEAL UNDER SECTION 30 OF THE WORKMENS COMPENSATION ACT- 1923 '^-3, MJL (G.) No. 236/20C® AFraaLaLABIT Orientafc fesa'ance Imafted ^ Venidu KB3»onDEarra ""^l^iN^^^® SB:- HCTI. Sfari N.K. Agarwal, J PREE^TT:- Shri Sudhir A^awat, Advocate, for the aiqielteit. Shri Vijsy Kumar Sabu, Adv. for respondents No. 1 and 3. None for respondenft No.2 thoi^iserved. ORAL ORDBR (9-8-2010) 1. The appeal is adaitted fer hearii^ on (be foBowing substantial questioa oflaw:- •Whether learaed Coimntesioiier for Worlaaan^ Gompensation was justified in allowir^ ffte application for compen^Etion fiUed by the respondeat No. 1 wlltoout recOTdtoig a flndng regarding depeadency of the respondeat No. 1/claimant? 2. With consait ofthe leamed counsel for the parties, the matteris heard finalfy. 3. Facts ofthe c^»In hrirf are as undCT:- 4. Deceased Wjay Kumm- Thakur was emifloyed as a labour ia Hari Om Rfce Mill of respondent No. 2; On 12-3-2006, the deeeased was worlcii^; to the ifee mfll and died on spot wWK wm-Mng jta tte aaill. The respondent No. 1/father ofthe deeeased, ddmis®to be sole depeiideirt of the deceased fited a& ajqdte^on " uiider Section 10 of Che Worfcmmi Compensdion Act, 1928 for compensatton for the death of the 7. 8. 9. 10. Leanied Commissioaer 'for Workaaan Compensation allowed tfae applicatl(m and awarded Rs. 2»35,435/" aiong wifh interest @ Rs. 12% pcr anxuuu from ti date of applicaUon if appeUant feite to deposit the amouat wtthin 40 days and also awarded 30% amount i.e. Rs. 1,17,712f- as penalty. A bare perusal of fhe award passed by leamed Commissiniier for Woitanan Compeasation would reveal tbat despite spedfic issue reganUag dependemy of fhe claimant being framal, <fae same has iK>t been consldered by fhe Ctommissioner whfle p^sii^ the award. In view ofthe abave, in the considered (^rinioa of liris Court, the matter desaves to be aad is hereby remitted back to the Coanaussrionca- for deciding the mattCT afi-esh aftier considering the quesflaa of dependency of fhe respondeat No. l/claiinairt as weB as respondent N0. 3 afi-esh on its own mCTtts in aecordance with law. Parttes are permitted to adduce addSti/oaaal widexuxs, if so advlsed on the questkn of dependency. They sfaaU appear before fhe Commissioaer on 13-9-2010and Ite CoaaiaissloiMr for Wortanan Compensatfon diall decide the matter expeditiousty prefexatily wifhia a period ofthree months fhereaflBr. The appeal 1s aUowed and fhe award is set a^deto the aboveextent Record of fhe case be seat back fmfhwith. No order as to costs. N.K. Agrawa! Judge