MALLIKARJUNA G. HIREMATH versus BRANCH MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.& ANR.

MALLIKARJUNA G. HIREMATH versus BRANCH MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.& ANR.

The employer is not liable under Section 3(1) of the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923, as there was no causal connection between the driver’s accidental death by drowning and his employment; the requirements of 'arising out of and in the course of employment' were not met.

Parties
Appellant: Mallikarjuna G. Hiremath; Respondent: Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.; Respondent: Respondent No. 2 (wife of deceased Veeresh Kumar)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
12 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court (decision on Appeal From High Court Judgment)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; order of compensation against appellant set aside.
Legal Topics
Workmen Compensation, Employer's Liability, Interpretation of Accident Under Workmen Compensation Act
Labour Law Insurance Law Workmen Compensation Employer's Liability Interpretation of Accident Under Workmen Compensation Act

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mallikarjuna G. Hiremath

Appellant

Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

Respondent

Respondent No. 2 (wife of deceased Veeresh Kumar)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court (decision on Appeal From High Court Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the employer is liable to pay compensation under Section 3(1) of the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923, for the death of a driver who drowned after slipping in a temple pond while on duty.

Ratio Decidendi

The employer is not liable under Section 3(1) of the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923, as there was no causal connection between the driver’s accidental death by drowning and his employment; the requirements of 'arising out of and in the course of employment' were not met.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; order of compensation against appellant set aside.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • No costs awarded.