Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2009 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (3) TMI 581 - HC - Companies LawWhether enforcement of an award made under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, can be stalled by the employer by taking re-course to section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985? A company which has become sick wants to revive ; whereas a poor workman who has fallen sick struggles to survive ; revival or survival, which overtakes the other ? Held that:- There can be no doubt that the payment of wages, gratuity and workmen's compensation form part of the day-to-day operation of the company. Since the BIFR itself has given such a free hand to the company, it is not at all fair on the part of the third respondent to refuse to pay the workman compensation by taking an untenable plea of embargo under section 22(1) of the SICA. It should be noted that the petitioner lost his right hand in the year 1998 and adjudication award was made in the year 2001 but still, the petitioner is not able to get the benefit of compensation. The pain and anguish of such a poor workman is understandable. The long arm of the court under article 226 of the Constitution of India, if not extended, the armless man's life would be further put in peril. As I have already concluded, this is a very appropriate situation where the power under article 226 of the Constitution of India should be exercised in favour of a poor litigant like the petitioner. Writ petition is allowed. Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 are directed to recover the amount as per the certificate issued by the Commissioner in accordance with the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act, 1890 expeditiously, preferably within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
|