Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.30 seconds)Section 4 in The Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 [Entire Act]
Section 102 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 304A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 58 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in The Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 [Entire Act]
Nagindas Ramdas vs Dalpatram Ichharam @ Brijram And Ors on 30 November, 1973
14. Now let me unfurl each of the contentions urged by
the combating parties and view the same in the beacon of light
of settled principles of law. In ECA cases the real litmus test
which the petitioners have to establish is whether the death is
during the course of employment. It is the case of the
petitioners that, the deceased was employed with the 1 st
respondent as House Keeper since 5 years and he was doing
house keeping work in Laughing Waters Association,
Ramagondanahalli, Whitefield road, Bengaluru which belongs
to 2nd respondent under the instruction of 1st respondent. But
whereas the respondents in unequivocal terms has categorically
admitted that the deceased was working as a house keeper
under respondent No.1. The admission in the pleadings has to
be placed in a higher pedestal than that of the evidentiary
admissions. As per Sec.58 of Indian Evidence Act, admitted
facts need not to be proved. Furthermore at this juncture to rely
on decision reported AIR 1971 SC 474 between Nagindas vs.
SCCH-23 10 ECA. No.101/2022
Dalpathram Icharam. As per the above said decision, judicial
admission i.e., admission in the pleadings has to be given a
higher pedestrial than that of evidentiary admission. Reverting
back to the factual matrix, in the instant case on hand the
deceased was employed with the 1st respondent and this factum
is categorically admitted during the course of written statement.
When such being the case, there is no mist of doubt in the mind
of this court. Added more it is also unequivocally admitted by
RW.1 during the course of cross-examination that, deceased
was employed under him and the working timings is from 8.00
a.m. to 5.00 p.m. This admission of RW.1 is also reaffirmed by
RW.2 as hereunder:
Saberabibi Yakubbhai Shaikh & Ors vs National Ins.Co.Ltd.& Ors on 2 January, 2014
24. INTEREST & LIABILITY : Relying upon the ratio laid
down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the decision reported in AIR
2014 SUPREME COURT 1393 (Saberabibi Yakubbhai Saikh vs.
National insurance Co Ltd., and others), this court hold that the
petitioner is entitled for interest at the rate of 12% p.a., from the
date of incident i.e., 08.01.2021 till the date of realization.
1