IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD SATURDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V. SEETHAPATHY C.M.A. NO : 59 of 2004 Between: 1. Venkatu Mutyammamma and others ..... APPELLANTS AND 1. Mantriraju Gopalarao and another .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.V. SEETHAPATHY C.M.A. No:59 OF 2004 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the order, dated 28.8.2003 in W.C.No.74 of 2002 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Vijayawada, wherein the claim of the appellants was dismissed. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellants and respondents. Perused the records. The appellants herein filed the claim application before the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Vijayawada, seeking compensation for the death of the deceased Sanyasi Naidu, who was employed as a cleaner on the lorry bearing No.AP 16T 4662 belonged to the 1st respondent and insured with the 2nd respondent. It is stated that on 29.12.2001, the deceased died in the course of employment as the lorry met with an accident. The claimants further pleaded that the deceased was aged about 25 years and was drawing a salary of Rs.2,000/- per month. The learned Commissioner dismissed the claim application on the ground that it was not pleaded nor stated in the evidence that the claimants were dependants on the income of the deceased at the time of his death. It is not disputed that the 1st claimant is the wife and claimants 2 and 3 are the children and claimants 4 and 5 are the parents of the deceased. The above relationship of the claimants with the deceased is referred to in the impugned order also. Simply because it is not specifically pleaded that the claimants were depending on the income of the deceased, the learned Commissioner ought not to have dismissed the claim application itself when there is no dispute regarding the relationship of the claimants with the deceased and when it is not the case of the opposite parties that the claimants were having alternative source of income or means of livelihood other than the income of the deceased. Having regard to the fact that the Act is a beneficial piece of legislation intended to provide succor to the unfortunate family members in the event of death of the bread winner of the family on account of the accident that occurred in the course of employment, the hyper technical approach resorted to by the learned Commissioner is unwarranted. As an authority under the Act entrusted with the duty of adjudicating the claim, the learned Commissioner ought to have adopted more pragmatic and positive approach in dealing with settlement of such claims instead of disposing of the same on technicalities. In these circumstances, it is considered that the matter be remanded to the learned Commissioner for fresh disposal in accordance with law and on merits, after giving an opportunity to both sides to adduce such further evidence as they may like. As the matter is of the year 2002, the learned Commissioner is directed to dispose of the same, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The impugned order is accordingly set aside. In the result, the CMA is allowed and the matter is remanded to the learned Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Vijayawada. ____________________ Justice G.V. Seethapathy Date: 5th December, 2009 Note: CC in one week (B/o) Nn. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.V. SEETHAPATHY C.M.A. No:59 OF 2004 05.12.2009