E.S.I. Corporation vs Ouseph

J.B. Koshy, J.—The respondent in this case was employed in a company and he was covered under the Employees'' State Insurance Scheme (E.S.I. Scheme). During the course of his employment he met with an accident on 19.2.1990 and as a result of the accident the tip portion of his ring finger of the right hand was amputated. Sickness benefit was granted during the period when he was under treatment by the Employees'' State Insurance Corporation. The respondent''s/claimant''s request for reference of his disability for a decision by the Medical Board was turned down by the E.S.I. Corporation. Therefore, he approached the Employees'' Insurance Court. The Employees'' Insurance Court held that eventhough the respondent was not paying contribution on the date of accident, since the accident took place during the benefit period, he is entitled for compensation. The application as paying contribution for a period ended on 30.9.1989. The corresponding benefit period was from 1.1.1990 to 30.6.1990. The accident happened on 19.2.1990. Since the accident happened during the benefit period, the Employees'' Insurance Court directed the corporation to refer the matter to the Medical Board for assessing the percentage of disability and obtain a certificate for granting compensation. The fact that the accident occurred during the course of employment and as a result of the accident the tip portion of his ring finger of the right hand was amputated etc. were not questioned. He was paid sickness benefit also by the Corporation.

We see no ground to hold that the respondent in not entitled to disability compensation merely because contribution period was over at the time of accident as accident happened during the benefit period. In this connection we refer to S. 2(14) of the Employees'' State Insurance Act, 1948, wherein "insured person" is defined as follows:

"2(14) "insured person" means a person who is or was an employee in respect of whom contributions are or were payable under this Act and who is, by reason thereof, entitled to any of the benefits provided by this Act."

Even according to the Corporation, during the benefit period, one is entitled to sickness benefit. That shows that during the benefit period one continues to be an "insured person". The Madras High Court had considered the entire matter in an identical case and held that in such case of the E.S.I. corporation is bound to pay disability compensation to the employees if accident occurred during the benefit paid (Tirupur Textiles (Private) Ltd. v. E.S.I. Corporation (1998) 1 LLN 688). The amount involved in the matter is also very negligible and we see no ground to interfere with the impugned order.

The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.