Kiran Raj

The Supreme Court Division Bench of Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Manmohan dismissed an appeal by an insurance company against compensation granted to the dependents of a deceased employee under the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923. While affirming the Karnataka High Court’s decision that the deceased’s widowed sisters were entitled to compensation, the Court observed that the existing statutory definition of “dependent” is outdated as it excludes a major widowed sister from such benefit. The Bench therefore recommended that the Union Government refer the issue to the Law Commission of India to consider appropriate amendments to the Act.

The case originated from a compensation claim under the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923, following the death of an employee. The deceased was survived by two widowed sisters who were financially dependent on him. The Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation classified the widowed sisters as “dependents” under Section 2(1)(d)(iii)(d) of the Act and awarded compensation accordingly.

Also Read: Innocent Vehicle Owner Entitled To Interim Custody; NDPS Disposal Rules Don’t Curtail Special Court’s Power : Supreme Court

The insurance company appealed before the High Court of Karnataka, contending that since both sisters were majors, they could not be treated as dependents under the Act, which defines a dependent as “a minor brother, or an unmarried sister or a widowed sister if a minor.” The High Court upheld the award, affirming the Commissioner’s finding of dependency.

The insurance company then appealed to the Supreme Court. During the hearing, the Bench examined the meaning and relevance of “dependent” within the statutory framework. Observing that the provision had not evolved with changing social conditions, the Court sought the Union Government’s assistance to clarify whether the existing definition excluded adult widowed sisters who were genuinely dependent on the deceased.

It “observed that the definition of the word ‘dependent’ … in Section 2(1)(d)(iii)(d) means ‘a minor brother or an unmarried sister or a widowed sister if a minor.’” The Court further “stated that in the present time, no one will normally find a widowed sister who is a minor, especially after enactment of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.”

Referring to the need for legal clarity, the Bench “was of the opinion that appropriate assistance would be required from the Union of India in the light of prescriptions in Section 2(1)(d)(iii)(d) of the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923.” It also “recorded that

Also Read: Andhra Pradesh High Court Orders Separate CID and ACB Probes Into Alleged Irregularities and Theft of Offerings at Tirumala Temple

The Supreme Court stated: “We do not wish to interfere with the impugned judgment. The appeal is accordingly dismissed, however, leaving the question of law open. The matter needs to be considered by the Law Commission of India for suitable amendment of the aforesaid provision or any other in the 1923 Act.”

“A copy of the order be sent to the Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, who may further refer the same to the Chairperson, Law Commission of India.” The Registry was instructed to notify the respondents so they could withdraw the compensation amount deposited in the Karnataka High Court.

Advocates Representing the Parties

For the Appellant: Mr. Salil Paul, Advocate; Mr. Sahil Paul, Advocate; Ms. Manjeet Chawla, AOR; Mr. Sandeep Dayal, Advocate; Ms. Kiran Bala Agarwal, Advocate

For the Respondents: Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Additional Solicitor General; Ms. Shreya Jain, Advocate; Mr. Anirudh Singh, Advocate; Ms. B.L.N. Shivani, Advocate; Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR

Case Title: The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Kogga & Ors.
Case Number: Civil Appeal No. 2574 of 2011
Bench: Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Manmohan