Umakanthan53
Labour Law & Hr Consultant

Cite.Co is a repository of information and resources created by industry seniors and experts sharing their real world insights. Join Network
A work man working with some automobile dealership got injured with in the premises after getting hurt by the demo car coming from inside the work shop. He was not covered under epf and esic act and the employer cunningly made him take compensation under MACT act and escaped from his liability leaving the employee in lurch.
Now as per law one can take compensation only under one act, plz tell us the further course of action as labour department going to tuned down our request under payment of compensation act as he has taken compensation under MACT act.

Dear friend,
It is over once for all. Since the employer, as a dealer, was the owner of the insured demo vehicle his employee was compensated under the MV Act. Section 167 of the M.V Act,1988 permits the option of claim for compensation for death or bodily injury only either under the EC Act,1923 or the M.V Act,1988 but not under both.

Sir
i am asking for the further opinion as claim under MVACT was negligble as compared to work man compensation act.Employer cunningly persuaded the employee to get compensation under MVACT despite the fact that accident happened with in the permises and absolutely liable for compensation.
He has got disability and entitled for more compensation as he is not able to stand straight and being gun man he is no more fit.He was getting salary @ 15000/- and was covered under both act ie ESIC and EPF Act but employer failed to comply with the act and had not enrolled as member under the ACTS.
I am looking for the way by which he can get compensation under WC Act.He is ready to pay back the compensation received ubder MACT Act.Is there any provision under this act.
Plz help

Sorry, my dear friend, I am unable to offer any alternative in view of the compensation claim having been filed, enquired and disposed of by the competent Tribunal under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. In my opinion, any further claim for compensation under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 for the same employment accident would be barred by the doctrine of Resjudicata.
This discussion thread is closed. If you want to continue this discussion or have a follow up question, please post it on the network.
Add the url of this thread if you want to cite this discussion.






About Us Advertise Contact Us
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service



All rights reserved @ 2020 Cite.Co™