AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner is before this Court challenging Ext.P2 order of the Employees’ Compensation Commissioner (Industrial Tribunal and Employees Insurance Court), Thiruvananthapuram, directing the petitioner to pay to the legal heirs of late Ravindran Nair a sum of Rs.8,15,400/- as compensation on account of the injury sustained during the course of the employment of late Ravindran Nair with the petitioner, a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards funeral expenses and a sum of Rs,1,631/- towards court fee. The petitioner has also challenged Exts.P6 and P7 orders rejecting applications filed by the petitioner for condoning the delay in filing the application for setting aside the ex parte order and the order rejecting the application to set aside the ex parte order on the ground that the delay in filing the application had not been condoned.
The principal contention taken by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that, though the petitioner had initially entered appearance in the matter before the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner, Thiruvananthapuram, through a lawyer, the case was transferred from the Court of the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner, Thiruvananthapuram, to the Industrial Tribunal, Kollam, where it was re-numbered as ECC No.471 of 2014. It is stated that thereafter, the matter was re-transferred and posted before the Industrial Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram, where it was re-numbered as ECC No.152 of 2017. It is further stated that the petitioner did not receive notice of any proceedings from the Industrial Tribunal, Kollam or from the Industrial Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram and, therefore, the petitioner could not contest the matter properly.
The learned counsel appearing for the party respondents would submit that the petitioner had initially entered appearance before the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner through a lawyer and yet no written statement had been filed by the petitioner. It is submitted that the notice was issued to the petitioner (at the same address in which he had initially received the notice) by the Industrial Tribunal, Kollam, as also by the Industrial Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram. However, the said notices were returned with the endorsement ‘not known’. It is further submitted that writ petition is also filed from the same address and only the pin code is different. It is submitted that in such circumstances it is clear that the petitioner was wilfully evading notice and the orders of the Industrial Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram, refusing to condone the delay in filing the application for setting aside the ex parte order and the order dismissing the application for setting aside the ex parte order on the ground that the delay was not condoned are completely justified in law.
Taking note of the contentions raised by both sides, a report was called for from the Industrial Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram. Accordingly, a report has been placed for the consideration of this Court by the Employees' Compensation Commissioner (Industrial Tribunal & Employees' Insurance Court), Thiruvananthapuram. The report reads thus:
1.“The case was originally filed by Smt. Girija Kumari, W/o Late Raveendran Nair, Mulayara Veedu, Kattayilkonam, Oorupoika P.O., Thiruvananthapuram, against Sri.Pramod, residing at 5/366, Prameelalayam, Vallakadavu, Mudakkal, Attingal, Thiruvananthapuram-695103, before the Court of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Thiruvananthapuram, as W.C.C. No. 90 of 2011 on 30.11.2011.
2.Verification of the case records reveals that Advocate Sri. Jose Varghese (Roll No. K/000290/1986) entered appearance on behalf of the respondent by filing a vakalath on 26.03.2012 before the original Court. However, no written statement was filed on behalf of the respondent.
3.On 24.05.2014, consequent upon the reorganisation of jurisdiction, the case transferred from the Court of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Thiruvananthapuram, to the Industrial Tribunal, Kollam, where it was renumbered as E.C.C. No. 471 of 2014. A registered notice was thereafter issued to the respondent, Sri. Pramod, at 5/366, Prameelalayam, Vallakadavu, Mudakkal, Attingal, Thiruvananthapuram -695103, informing him that the case was posted to 28.10.2016. The notice was despatched on 11.08.2016. However, the registered notice was returned unserved with the postal endorsement "Not Known."
4.Subsequently, upon the constitution of the Industrial Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram, the records were transferred from the Industrial Tribunal, Kollam, to this Court on 25.07.2017, where the case was renumbered as E.C.C. No. 152 of 2017 (Old No. E.C.C. No. 471 of 2014).
5.After receipt of the records, this Court issued a registered notice to the respondent, Sri.Pramod, at the above address, informing him that the case was posted to 22.11.2017. The notice was despatched on 14.11.2017. However, the registered notice was returned unserved with the postal endorsement "Not Known."
6.After the pronouncement of the final award, the respondent failed to deposit the compensation amount before this Court. Consequently, revenue recovery proceedings were initiated against the respondent at the address available in the case records, namely, Sri.Pramod, 5/366, Prameelalayam, Vallakadavu, Mudakkal, Attingal, Thiruvananthapuram. Pursuant to the said revenue recovery proceedings, the respondent entered appearance before this Court through his counsel, Advocate Madavoor Saheer E. K. (Roll No. K/927/2013).”
Taking note of the contents of the report dated 23.07.2026, I am of the opinion that the Ext.P2 order in E.C.C. No. 152/2017 has to be set aside, as the notices issued to the petitioner, when the case was transferred to the Industrial Tribunal, Kollam, from the Workmen’s Compensation Commission, Thiruvananthapuram, and again when it was re-transferred to the Industrial Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram, were returned with the endorsement 'not known'. Though the petitioner had initially entered appearance before the Workmen’s Compensation Commission, Thiruvananthapuram, through counsel, this fact does not compel me to hold that the petitioner was not entitled to further notice when the case was transferred to Kollam and thereafter when it was re-transferred to Thiruvananthapuram.
Therefore, this writ petition is allowed. Ext.P2 order in E.C.C. No. 152/2017 (Old No. WCC 90/2011, E.C.C 471/2014) on the file of the Employees’ Compensation Commissioner (Industrial Tribunal & Employees Insurance Court), Thiruvananthapuram, is set aside. The petitioner and respondents 1 and 2 shall appear before the Employees' Compensation Commissioner (Industrial Tribunal & Employees' Insurance Court), Thiruvananthapuram, at 11:00 A.M. on 09.10.2026, and the matter shall be disposed of afresh by the Employees' Compensation Commissioner (Industrial Tribunal & Employees' Insurance Court), Thiruvananthapuram, after affording an opportunity to both sides, within a period of three months thereafter. Since the claim of respondents 1 and 2 arose from the death of the husband of the 1st respondent/father of the 2nd respondent, and since the claim has been pending since 2011, I am of the opinion that the petitioner can be directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) provisionally to respondents 1 and 2 within a period of one month from today. If the petitioner does not pay the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) within a period of one month from today, any defense that may be entered by the petitioner before the Employees' Compensation Commissioner (Industrial Tribunal & Employees' Insurance Court), Thiruvananthapuram, will stand struck off. The amount paid by the petitioner shall be treated as provisional and subject to the final orders to be passed by the Court as directed above.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.