Compensation awarded to plumber died falling from CA Society Building.

Compensation awarded to plumber died falling from CA Society Building. There was no evidence that deceased committed suicide -High Court

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2105 (2017) (10) HC

A plumber working with the CA Society apartment fell down from the building resulting in fatal injuries and eventually died. The widow of the deceased (respondent in the present case) filed an application for compensation before the Commissioner, Employees’ Compensation.

She admitted before the Commissioner, Employees’ Compensation that the deceased was employed with the CA Housing Society for the last about 28 years as a plumber and his last drawn salary was Rs.5,000/- per month. The appellant further admitted that the deceased was on duty on the day of the accident. However, the CA Housing Society (the appellant of the present case) defended the case by submitting that the deceased committed suicide by jumping from the building and, therefore, respondent is not entitled to any compensation.

The Commissioner, Employees’ Compensation held that the deceased met with an accident and suffered fatal injuries during the course of his employment with the appellant and, therefore, the widow was entitled to compensation of Rs.6,77,760/- along with interest @ 12% per annum and funeral charges of Rs. 5,000/-.

The High Court observed that as per Final Inquest Report under Section 174 Cr.P.C, the deceased was on duty and around 12:00 PM, he went to the top of building of CA Apartments to check the pipeline and he fell down from there and was taken to Hospital, where he was declared as brought dead.

The High Court was of the view that the deceased suffered/ met with the accident during the course of his employment with the appellant.

The High Court dismissed the appeal holding that no substantial question of law was involved. It was observed that there was no merit in the appellant’s contention that the deceased committed suicide in as much as no one in the appellant’s society had seen the deceased jumping from the building. There was no evidence to support the contention of the appellant that the deceased committed suicide by jumping from the building.