\..:'\ \s " ^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR / MISC. APPEAL N0. / ^ OF 200^ APPELLANTS CLAIMANTS /• ^- ,/^ ^ ^ 0>r ^y^ ^r/..%t '^^w/yA ^ :. w^^ Smt. Nikodina Tirkey, widow of lateShri Benjamin Tirkey, aged about 35 years; Ku. Ne61am Lata, aged about 14 years; y. Nitish Kumar Tirkey, aged about 13 years; 4^ Ku. Nilima Tirkey, aged about 12 years; 5^ Ku. Shashi Suman Tirkey, aged about 3 years; ^^A^oU^ ^ t^ ^^^^r, 7X / The above named appellant no.2 to 4 are Minor, through natural guardian mother Smt. Nikodina Tirkey, and all Resident of Village- Aamadih, Tahsil Kunkuri, District Jashspur (C.G.). VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^ ^ S.E.C.L. Through: The Chief General Manager, S.E.C.L. Bilaspur (C.G.). S.E.C.L. Through: The Deputy Chief „ Personal ^ Manager, S.E.C.fc; Kusmunda Area, District Korba (C.G.). ® /' ..i^.F__: c^ ^' MEMO OF APPEAl ^ ^L- JNDER SECTION 30 (1} OF WORKMEN'S €^^or^^ •^ft&'Q^ COMPENSATION ACT. 1923 ^Wf .^_/_j^__^^^!^^-L HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BIIASFUR MISC. APPEAL N0. 123 OF 2006 APPBLLANTS7 Ci.AIMANTS RESPQNDENTS Smt. Nikodina Tirkey and others. Versus S.E.C.L. Thi'ough: The Chief General Maiiager, S.E.C.L., Bilaspaur and another. APPEAL UNDER SBCTION 30111 OF WORKMBN»S COMPENSATSON ACT, 1923 Division Beiich:Hon'b!e Shri £*M. Ouddusi & Hoa'ble Shri G. Miahaiaddia, JJ. Presesat:: Shri Shailendra Sharma, counsel for the appellants. Shri O.P. Agrawaly counsel for the responclents. ORAL ORDBR (Passed on 13th day ofJune, 2011) Per Z.M. Qiaddiasi, J< Heai-d. 2. Tliis appeal has been ffled agaiiist tiie impugned awai'd dated 09-12-2004 passed by tlie Conimissioner for Workineii's Compeusation Act, Labour Com't, Bllaspur m Case N0.9/WCA/COC/B-1/04/F/Claim, dismissmg tiie petition oftiie appellaiits/claimaiits. 3. Brief facts of tlie case ai'e tiiat ti'ie appellaiits/clahiiaiits were flie dependaiits of tiie deceased Benjaiiiui Tu'key, who was a daily wage employee of tiie respoxidents. Wheu he was on duty, he died aU of a sudden 011 16-01-2003 as a natm'al deatli. There was no accident or any external injury was rec'eived by hiiii. One of the dependaiits of tlie deceased has been given compassionate appouitment aad she is gettmg about Rs.7,600/- p.m. Besides tliis, a residence as well as fr-ee 9. ,r^r®^. .^ r< medical facUity aiid free cooking gas etc. have been provided to the faoiUy of the deceased. The clamiaiits coucealed tliis fact at the time of fllirig of tlie clalm petitioii. However, the respondeiits informed tlie Coiumlssioner for Workmen's Compeiisation about tliis fact which was not deriied. 3. Sectlon 3 of tiie Workmen's CoBipensation Act, 1923 (for shoit the Acf} iniposed tlTie Uability for payment of compensation. Sub-section (1) thereof provides that - if personal uijuiy is caused to a workmaii by accident aiisiiig out of aiid iii the com'se of l~us employment, lils employer shall be Uable to pay compensation iii accordaiice witli tiie provisions giveii m fhat cliapter. Section 4 of tlie Act provides for tiie aiiiouiit of compensation whei-e death results from tlie uijmy. Siiice in flie iiistaiit case, deatli was not resiilt of aiiy injmy, no case for compensation under Workmen?s Compensation Act had aiisen. Moreover, one of tlie depeiidaiits of the deceased has got compassionate appoiiitment along witli otlier fac-Uities, as mentioiied above. 4. In view oi the above, we are of the opmion that fhe claiiii petition has riglitly been dismissed by tiie Commissioiier for Workmen's Compensation. Therefore, this appeal has no force and is dismissed accordiiigly. 5. No order as to costs. Sd/- I.M. Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge K-vr