SURESH PASWAN versus M/S. KLA CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. & ORS.

Citation: [2022] 7 S.C.R. 218 · Decided: 16-09-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
218
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 7 S.C.R.
SURESH PASWAN
v.
M/S. KLA CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGIES
PVT. LTD. & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 6523 of 2022)
SEPTEMBER 16, 2022
    [M. R. SHAH AND KRISHNA MURARI, JJ.]
Compensation – Appellant-employee fell down from the roof
of the first floor and suffered grievous injuries while working at
the construction site under the respondent-employer – Commissioner,
Employees’ Compensation awarded Rs.3,74,364/- towards
compensation – Order set aside by High Court – On appeal, held :
Disability Certificate was issued by the doctor in 2009 and the
Medical Board constituted pursuant to the order passed by the High
Court examined the injured employee after a period of approximately
nine years from the date of accident – Appellant did suffer the
injuries due to fall and at the relevant time, it affected his 60%
earning capacity – Pursuant to the earlier order passed by the High
Court, out of total sum of Rs. 7,52,471/- deposited by the respondent,
the appellant has already withdrawn 50% of the amount, i.e.,
Rs. 3,76,236/- – This shall be treated as full and final settlement of
his claim towards compensation with interest for the disability
suffered – Order passed by the High Court set aside.
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: It is true that the Medical Board in its report dated
09.11.2017 has opined that the appellant has not suffered any
permanent disability. However, at the same time, the disability
certificate issued was of the year 2009 and the Medical Board
constituted pursuant to the order passed by the High Court
examined the injured employee after a period of approximately
nine years from the date of accident. Considering the fact that
the appellant did suffer the injuries due to fall and at the relevant
time, it affected his 60% earning capacity, it may not be that
nothing was to be awarded to the appellant – injured employee
by way of compensation. Pursuant to the earlier order passed by
the High Court, out of total sum of Rs. 7,52,471/- deposited by
[2022] 7 S.C.R. 218
218
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
219
the respondent, the appellant has already withdrawn 50% of the
amount, i.e., Rs. 3,76,236/-. The impugned judgment and order
passed by the High Court is hereby quashed and set aside. Under
the circumstances and in the facts of the case, the appellant is
entitled to Rs. 3,76,236/- towards compensation with interest for
the disability suffered by him, which the appellant has already
withdrawn and be treated as full and final settlement of the claim
of the appellant towards compensation with interest for the
disability suffered by him. [Paras 3-5][220-F-G; 220-H; 221-A-
D]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 6523
of 2022.
From the Judgment and Orders dated 27.04.2018 of the High
Court of Delhi at New Delhi in FAO No.511 of 2016.
Ajay Choudhary, Adv. for the Appellant.
Amit George, K. K. Shukala, Kartickay Mathur, Anand Shankar,
Pulkit Tare, Advs. for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
M. R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment
and order passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in First
Appeal No. 511 of 2016, by which the High Court has allowed the said
appeal preferred by the respondent – employer and has set aside the
order passed by the Commissioner, Employees’ Compensation awarding
compensation of Rs. 3,74,364/- to the appellant herein, the injured
employee has preferred the present appeal.
2. That the appellant filed an application for compensation before
the Commissioner, Employees’ Compensation. It was the case on behalf
of the appellant that while he was working at the construction site under
the respondent-employer, he fell down from the roof of the first floor
and suffered grievous injuries, which resulted in 60% permanent disability.
The appellant relied upon the disability certificate dated 13.09.2009 issued
by Dr. Umesh Kumar Singh, Civil Surgeon-cum-Medical Officer,
Gardiner Road Hospital, Patna certifying that the appellant sustained
60% disability, which was as a result of the accident. It appears that the
respondent – employer disputed the disability certificate dated 13.09.2009
SURESH PASWAN v. M/S. KLA CONSTRUCTION
TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
220
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 7 S.C.R.
as well as his disability as assessed 60% under the said disability
certificate. The learned Commissioner, Employees’ Compensation
awarded a total sum of Rs. 3,74,364/- towards the compe

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.