Employee Compensation Dispute: A Case Analysis on Disability and Compensation Calculation

This case involves a legal battle concerning compensation following a workplace injury. The appellant, Suresh Paswan, filed for compensation after falling from a roof while working at a construction site. The accident resulted in what the appellant claimed to be a 60% permanent disability. The Commissioner for Employees’ Compensation awarded Rs. 3,74,364/- to the appellant based on the disability certificate issued by a Civil Surgeon in 2009. However, the respondent, M/s. Kla Construction Technologies Pvt. Ltd., disputed the disability claim and the compensation amount. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court following a decision by the High Court of Delhi, which overturned the compensation award. The Supreme Court’s ruling brings crucial insights into the process of determining workers’ compensation and the credibility of disability certificates in such cases.

The appellant’s case was that while working for the respondent as a construction worker, he fell from the first-floor roof and sustained grievous injuries, which led to his claim of a 60% permanent disability. The appellant relied on a disability certificate issued by Dr. Umesh Kumar Singh, a Civil Surgeon from Patna, which certified that the appellant had sustained a 60% disability due to the accident. The respondent employer, however, contested the certificate and the assessment of disability, asserting that the appellant had not suffered any permanent disability.

The case began with the appellant filing a claim for compensation before the Commissioner for Employees’ Compensation. In its ruling, the Commissioner awarded Rs. 3,74,364/- to the appellant, considering his permanent disability to be 60%. The employer, dissatisfied with the decision, appealed to the High Court. During the appeal, the employer requested that a Medical Board be constituted to examine the appellant’s disability, which the High Court granted. The Medical Board, after a thorough examination, submitted a report in November 2017, stating that the appellant did not suffer any permanent disability.

Read also: https://judgmentlibrary.com/supreme-court-upholds-high-court-order-on-employee-allocation-between-andhra-pradesh-and-telangana/

The High Court, based on the findings of the Medical Board, set aside the compensation award passed by the Commissioner. The High Court’s judgment was a setback for the appellant, who had relied heavily on the 2009 disability certificate. As a result, the appellant filed an appeal in the Supreme Court, challenging the High Court’s decision.

The Supreme Court, in its ruling, took into account the contradictory reports. The Court noted that the 2009 disability certificate was issued shortly after the accident, while the Medical Board report came nearly nine years after the incident. The Court highlighted that at the time of the initial application, the employer had not made any request for a Medical Board to examine the appellant. This delay, the Court opined, was significant, as it meant that the Medical Board’s findings did not reflect the appellant’s condition at the time of the injury.

Justice M.R. Shah, delivering the judgment, noted that despite the Medical Board’s conclusion, it was undeniable that the appellant had sustained injuries from the fall. The appellant’s disability had affected his earning capacity at the time of the accident, and thus, compensation was warranted. The Court found that the appellant was entitled to some compensation for the disability he suffered, even if the precise extent of that disability was disputed. In this regard, the Court stated that it would not ignore the fact that the injury had affected the appellant’s ability to earn and that compensation should be awarded for the losses suffered.

The Supreme Court ultimately quashed the High Court’s decision and ruled in favor of the appellant, but only partially. The Court determined that the appellant was entitled to a total sum of Rs. 3,76,236/- as compensation. The appellant had already withdrawn 50% of the awarded amount, which had been deposited by the respondent. The Court directed that this amount be considered as full and final settlement for the appellant’s claim. The remaining funds in the deposit were to be released to the respondent if not already withdrawn.

Read also: https://judgmentlibrary.com/curative-petition-in-military-pension-dispute-rejected-supreme-court-upholds-judicial-finality/

This judgment underscores the complexity of workers’ compensation claims, particularly when dealing with long-term disability and conflicting medical assessments. It also highlights the importance of timely medical evaluations and the need for employers to be proactive in ensuring that employees’ health issues are properly addressed. The Supreme Court’s ruling balances the equities by awarding a partial settlement while acknowledging the appellant’s injury, despite the discrepancy in disability reports.

Petitioner Name: Suresh Paswan.
Respondent Name: M/s. Kla Construction Technologies Pvt. Ltd..
Judgment By: Justice M.R. Shah, Justice Krishna Murari.
Place Of Incident: Delhi.
Judgment Date: 16-09-2022.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: suresh-paswan-vs-ms.-kla-constructio-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-16-09-2022.pdf