Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : I(1988)ACC208
..... in a public place ; provided that (i) a policy shall not be required to cover any liability in respect of death or bodily injury to any employee other than the liability arising under the workmen's compensation act, 1923, in respect of (a) driver of the vehicle, (b) conductor of a public service vehicle or (c) if it is a goods ..... , any such employee-(a) engaged in driving the vehicle ; or(b) if it is a public service vehicle, engaged as a conductor of the vehicle or in examining tickets on ..... arising out of and in the course of his employment, of the employee of a person insured by the policy or in respect of bodily injury sustained by such an employee arising out of and in the course of his employment, other than a liability arising under the workmen's compensation act, 1923, in respect of the death of or bodily injury to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : (1975)ILLJ394MP
..... deceased was employed for the purpose of departmental business as envisaged in the definition of 'workman' under section 2(1)(n) of the workmen's compensation act.8. under item (viii) of schedule ii of the workmen's compensation act unless the employment was in the construction, maintenance, repair or demolition of any building as specified in clause (a) beneath it, he ..... referring to the activities of the government in the field of productive industry, it was observed by their lordships of the supreme court in the secr., madras gymkhana club employees' union v. the management : (1967)iillj720sc , it was observed-the expansion of the governmental or municipal activities in fields of productive industry is a feature of all ..... or not the deceased was employed in the construction, repair or demolition of the building was concerned. it lost sight of the fact that if the employee was engaged for maintenance of the building then too he would be a workman within the meaning of cl.(n) of 2(1) of the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2002ACJ1495
..... . the facts as have been unfolded are that the respondent no. 1 claiming himself to be an employee of the petitioner's establishment filed an application under the provisions of workmen's compensation act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') contending, inter alia, that he is employed by the petitioner as welder on monthly wages of rs ..... . 3,000 and while he was discharging his duties on 24.8.1995 in the evening an accident took place by which he sustained serious injuries. he claimed an amount of rs. 6,03,200 towards compensation ..... 23 deals with the powers and procedure of the commissioner. the rules have been framed under section 32 of the act and the m.p. government has adopted the workmen's compensation rules, 1924 (hereinafter referred to as 'the rules'). part v of the rules deals with the procedure. rule 20 provides for .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1995ACJ1233
..... limitations as to use:(1) xxx xxx xxx(2) xxx xxx xxx(3) use for carrying passengers in the vehicle except employees (cleaner and driver) total six in number coming under the purview of workmen's compensation act, 1923.5. on behalf of the insurance company attention is also invited to the other terms of the insurance policy where ..... notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary the company shall indemnify the insured against his legal liability under:the workmen's compensation act, 1923 and subsequent amendments of that act prior to the date of this endorsement the fatal accidents act, 1855, or at common law in respect of personal injury to any paid driver (or cleaner or conductor or ..... in the two cases has to be re-computed in view of the legislative changes and the latest decisions of the supreme court. in motor vehicles act of 1988 a minimum compensation fixed for death, irrespective of no fault of the driver of the vehicle, is rs. 50,000/-. it is true that the present case is .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2000ACJ851
..... that the limit of liability would be rs. 1,50,000 in all, including the liabilities whatsoever under the workmen's compensation act, 1923, in respect of the death of, or bodily injury to, employees (excluding the driver), who are carried in the vehicle. it is not in dispute that mohd. mubin was travelling in the truck on 4.7.86. the truck was ..... company, the non-applicant no. 5 (which is shown as the respondent no. 8 in m.a. no. 35 of 1994) shall be jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation to the extent of rs. 1,50,000 (rupees one lakh fifty thousand) to the applicants (respondent nos. 1 to 5 in m.a. no. 35 of 1994) along with ..... . so far as the liability to third party in respect of bodily injury is concerned, the company's liability provided is limited to such amount as is necessary to meet the requirements of motor vehicles act. since the accident occurred in july, 1986, the motor vehicles act, 1939 would govern the case.8. it is not disputed that the truck in question in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2001ACJ2129; 2000(1)MPLJ384
..... the basis of submissions, we consider that justice should not be denied to any person and now the petitioner wants to resort to the remedy under the workmen's compensation act, we permit the petitioner to avail the remedy as may be available under the law and as may be advised.10. in view of above, the petition ..... the civil court is not to be treated as excluded. apart from this, the workmen's compensation act is a special act and section 10 deals with the claims. learned counsel submitted that he may be permitted to avail the remedy under workmen's compensation act, 1923 as the petitioner was pursuing the remedy as she was advised under the forum ..... under railway claims tribunal act and for the delay the commissioner under the fifth proviso has the ample power to condone the delay .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1997ACJ1311
..... vehicle, a limit of one lakh and fifty thousand rupees in all, including the liabilities, if any, arising under the workmen's compensation act, 1923 (8 of 1923), in respect of the death of, or bodily injury to, employees (other than the driver), not exceeding six in number, being carried in the vehicle;(b) where the vehicle is a ..... mention of the sum of rs. 15,000/- per passenger as liability, in the above term. the award for the entire sum of compensation having been given under the provisions of the motor vehicles act, 1939, the above expression would mean that the insurance company agreed to indemnify for the entire sum, as the liability therefor was incurred ..... the claimants have failed to prove what were the prospects in service-career of the two employees who met the premature death. in the absence of any evidence, it is not possible for this court in appeal to enhance the amount of compensation on that ground.24. the contention advanced on behalf of the claimants, however, deserves to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : (1971)IILLJ273MP; 1971MPLJ706
..... out of and in the course of his employment and the respondents were, in the alternative, entitled to recover compensation payable under the workmen's compensation act, 1923. since we are upholding the award of compensation under the fatal accidents act, it is not necessary to consider this alternative argument put forward for the respondents.15. the appeal fails and ..... ; a safe place of work.' [clerk and lindsell, 13th edition, p. 551.]normally, an employer owes no duty of care for the safety of his employee while the employee is proceeding to the place of employment from his house. the point, however, is whether the same rule prevails when the situation is abnormal and when as ..... a duty-situation existed in the circumstances of the instant case, it cannot be denied that an employer owes a duty of care for the safety of his employees. the general scope of this duty has been stated as follows:the obligation is threefold--'the provision of a competent staff of men, adequate material and a .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(5)MPHT258
..... all expenditure incurred by an employer in connection with the building or other construction work, excluding, the cost of land and any compensation paid or payable to a worker or his kin under the workmen's compensation act, 1923. rule 4 provides for time and manner of collection, indicating therein that:(1) the cess levied under sub-section ..... to be collected from every employer. moreover, it is urged that, for the sake of argument if it is construed that the contractor can be an employee then the levy can be on the cost of construction incurred by the employer, whereas in the case at hand, the learned counsel for the petitioners contends ..... discharge of its functions under section 22; and(b) salaries, allowances and other remuneration of the members, officers and other employees for the board;(c) expenses on objects and for purposes authorized by this act.(3) no board shall, in any financial year, incur expenses towards salaries, allowances and other remuneration to its members, officers .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : I(1993)ACC254; 1992ACJ312
..... to, any such employee,-(a) engaged in driving the vehicle, or(b) if it is a public service vehicle, engaged as a conductor of the vehicle or in examining ..... arising out of, and in course of, his employment, of the employee of a person, insured by the policy, or in respect of bodily injury, sustained by such an employee arising out of, and in the course of, his employment other than a liability, arising under the workmen's compensation act, 1923, in respect of the death of, or bodily injury ..... the reference in the following terms:with effect from 2nd march, 1970, the date of coming into force of the motor vehicles (amendment) act, 1969 (act no. 56 of 1969), a claim for compensation suffered for damage caused to property preferred by a third party in all circumstances can be tried by motor accidents claims tribunal in respect of .....
Tag this Judgment!