1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.1417 OF 2011
Girish @ Babalabhai s/o Champalal
Kochar, aged about 53 years,
occupation : business, r/o Hinganghat,
Tahsil Hinganghat, District Wardha.
ig ... Petitioner
- Versus -
1) Shankarrao Kachruji Maiskar,
aged 72 years, occupation : nil,
2) Sau. Prabhabai w/o Shankarrao
Maiskar, aged 62 years,
occupation : nil,
Both c/o Shri Manoj Lokhande,
"Lokmat" Press Reporter, Master
Colony, Ramnagar, Hinganghat,
Taluq Hinganghat, District
Wardha.
3) Kamal Jankilal Sahu, aged
about 42 years, occupation :
business, r/o Mundhada Colony,
near Chandankhede Welding
Works, Hinganghat, Taluq
Hinganghat, District Wardha. ... Respondents
-----------------
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:24:54 :::
2
Shri A.S. Chandurkar, Advocate for the petitioner.
Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 served.
Shri P.P. Kotwal, Advocate for the respondent no.3.
----------------
CORAM : R.M. SAVANT, J.
DATED : JUNE 29, 2011
ORAL JUDGMENT :
Rule, made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
with consent of Shri Chandurkar, learned Counsel for
the petitioner, and Shri Kotwal, learned Counsel for the
respondent no.3. None appears for the respondent
nos. 1 and 2 though served.
2) The above petition filed under Articles 226
and 227 of the Constitution of India takes exception to
the order dated 7/3/2011 whereby the application
(Exh. 2) for staying the judgment passed in Misc.
W.C.A. Case No.3/2008 and the Revenue Recovery
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 17:24:54 :::
3
Certificate No.71-1/2010 came to be rejected.
3) The respondent nos. 1 and 2 are the claimants in
the said Misc. W.C.A. Case No. 3/2008. The said claim
was on account of death of the son of respondent
nos. 1 and 2, who was working at the relevant time
with the petitioner, who was the principal employer
and the respondent no.3 herein was a Contractor
employed by the petitioner to carry out certain civil
works. The said Misc. W.C.A. Case No.3/2008 came to
be allowed and the petitioner and respondent no.3
were made jointly and severally liable for the amount
of Rs.1,69,533/- with interest at the rate of 12% per
annum from 24/8/2000 till its actual realization. The
said order records that in spite of service, the
petitioner did not participate in the said proceedings.
It appears that after the Misc. W.C.A. Case No.3/2008
came to be disposed of by order dated 20/9/2010, the
respondent nos. 1 and 2 entered into a settlement with
the respondent no.3 before the Lok Adalat, pursuant to
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 17:24:54 :::
4
which the respondent no.3 paid an amount of
Rs.1,10,000/- to the respondent nos. 1 and 2. Hence,
insofar as respondent no.3 is concerned, the
respondent nos. 1 and 2 have settled the matter.
4) The petitioner herein being aggrieved by the
said order dated
ig 20/9/2010 passed by the
Commissioner (Workmen’s Compensation) filed an
application, which was registered as Misc. W.C.A. Case
No.6/11 seeking setting aside of the said order on the
ground that the petitioner was not noticed in the said
proceedings. In Misc. W.C.A. Case No.6/2011, the
petitioner filed an application for stay, which was
numbered as Exh.2. The stay was sought on the self
same ground on which setting aside of the order dated
20/9/2010 was sought inter alia being that no notice of
the proceedings was served on the petitioner. The
said application (Exh.2) came to be rejected by the
Commissioner (Workmen’s Compensation) by the
impugned order dated 7/3/2011, thereby stay pending
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 17:24:54 :::
5
consideration of Misc. W.C.A. Case No.6/2011 came to
be refused.
5) In the instant petition, which has been filed
impugning the said order dated 7/3/2011, this Court by
an order dated 22/3/2011 had directed the petitioner
to deposit 50% of the amount payable in terms of the
order of the Commissioner (Workmen’s Compensation)
and furnish solvent surety/security for the remaining
50% of the amount. The learned Counsel for the
petitioner Shri Chandurkar states that the said order
has been complied with by the petitioner by depositing
an amount of Rs.1,60,043/- and that solvent
surety/security will be furnished by the petitioner in
the course of the present week.
6) Since interest of the respondent nos. 1 and 2
is now adequately protected, in my view the interest of
justice would be served if the impugned order dated
7/3/2011 is set aside and the application (Exh.2) is
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 17:24:54 :::
6
consequently allowed and stay to operate pending the
decision in Misc. W.C.A. Case No.6/2011. The amount
deposited by the petitioner in this Court as well as the
solvent surety/security that will be furnished by the
petitioner in the course of this week to be transmitted
to the Commissioner (Workmen’s Compensation),
Wardha. The ig Commissioner (Workmen’s
Compensation) thereafter to hear and decide Misc.
W.C.A. Case No.6/2010 as expeditiously as possible
and within a period of four weeks of the first
appearance of the petitioner before him. The
petitioner to appear before the Commissioner
(Workmen’s Compensation) on 7/7/2011 at 3 p.m.
7) Rule is accordingly made absolute in the
aforesaid terms with parties to bear their respective
costs.
JUDGE
khj
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 17:24:54 :::
