Download Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 – 2 and more Study notes Business Administration in PDF only on Docsity!
EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY FOR COMPENSATION
Section. 3 provides for employer’s liability to pay compensation to a workman. It lays down that the following conditions must exist before an employer may be held liable to pay compensation to a workman
(1) Some personal injury must have been caused to a workman; (2) Such an injury must have been caused by an accident; (3) The accident must have arisen out of and in the course of employment; and (4) The injury must have resulted either in the death of the workman or in his total or partial disablement for a period exceeding three days. But the employer shall not be liable (except in the case of the injury resulting in the workman’s death) to pay compensation in the following cases (1) If the injury did not result in total or partial disablement of the workman for a period exceeding three days; (2) If the workman was at the time of the accident under the influence of drink or drug, or (3) If the workman willfully disobeyed an order expressly given or a rule expressly framed for the purpose of securing safety of workman; or (4) If the workman willfully removed or disregarded any safety guard or other device which to his knowledge was provided for the purpose of securing his safety. In the case of disease, no compensation shall be payable to a workman in respect thereof, unless the same is directly attributable to an injury caused by an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.
But in respect of the occupational diseases, specified in Schedule III of the Act, contracted by a workman it shall be presumed that the contracting of the disease amounts to an injury caused by an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.
ACCIDENT OUT OF EMPLOYMENT
An accident arising out of employment implies a ‘casual connection ’ between the injury and the accident and the work done in the course of employment. Employment should be the distinctive and the proximate cause of the personal injury whether physical or mental. In the case Dennis Vs White, (1917) A.C.479 , it was laid down that “when a man runs a risk incidental to his employment and is thereby injured, the injury arises out of employment.”
ACCIDENT IN THE COURSE OF EMPLOYMENT
It suggests duration of employment or the period of time during which he employment continues. In the case Saurastra Salt Mfg. Co. Vs Bai Balu Raja (1958) SC 881, the Supreme Court held “as a rule the employment of a workman does not commence until he has reached the place of employment and does not continue when he has left the place of employment”. Following points in this connection are important to note.
- All movements of a worker from one place to another whether within the premises of the employer or to the premises of some other person in connection with the employment alone shall be taken to be the course of his employment.
- A person who is busy in performing his duty, under the terms of his employment, at any place, shall be taken to be working in the course of employment.
- Break for rest, refreshment, etc., within the premises of the employer is regarded as incidental to work and the worker is supposed to be in the course of his employment even for that period.
- When the workman uses transport provided by the employer for the purpose of going to and from the place of work, he is deemed to be in the course of employment during the time when he uses the transport. [Holmes Vs Great Northern Railway (1900) 2 Q.B.409]. OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE
AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION
The amount of compensation payable to a workman depends on (i) The nature of the injury caused by accident; (ii) The monthly wages of the workman concerned; and (iii) The relevant factor for working out lump-sum equivalent of compensation amount as specified in Schedule IV (as substituted by the Amendment Act of 1984). There is no distinction between an adult and a minor worker with respect to the amount of compensation. Now Section 4 (as substituted by the Amendment Act of 1984) provides for compensation for
- Death;
- Permanent total disablement;
- Permanent partial disablement;
- Temporary disablement, whether total or partial.
PROCEDURE FOR CLAIMING COMPENSATION
An injured workman may either file a civil suit for damages against the employer or claim compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act,
- He has to make a choice between these two reliefs.
Section 3(5) of the Act provides that no claim for compensation can be made under the Act if the workman has filed a civil suit. It further provides that a workman cannot file a suit for damages in any court of law if
(i) He has filed a claim under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923; or (ii) There is an agreement between the workmen and his employer providing for the payment of compensation according to the provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923.
In a civil suit for damages, the employer can put forward all the defences available to him under the law of torts. Moreover, a civil suit is a risky and costly affair. A claim under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 is safe and less costly.
APPEAL (Sec.30)
Under Section 30 of the Act, an appeal lies to the High Court from following orders of the Commissioner: (a) An order awarding as compensation, a lump sum whether by way of redemption of a half-monthly payment or otherwise or disallowing a claim in full or in part for a lump-sum. (b) An order awarding interest or penalty; (c) An order refusing to allow redemption of half-monthly payment;
