Skip to content


Nagumantri Sumati Bai and ors. Vs. Jogamma (N.) - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectLabour and Industrial
CourtAndhra Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1959)IILLJ270AP
AppellantNagumantri Sumati Bai and ors.
RespondentJogamma (N.)
Excerpt:
- - 500 awarded to her as compensation, must he deemed to have reverted back to the remaining dependants, the widow and the two minor sons, who would certainly have been entitled to this money as well, but for the existence of the mother at the time......the appellants is that as the mother is dependent on her other two sons, she should not have been allowed any compensation. it is unnecessary for me to go into this question as once it is granted that the mother is a dependant on the workman it is immaterial whether she had other means of income or not. the order of the additional commissioner awarding compensation to the mother is an order that cannot be questioned.3. but the point that now arises is this ; the mother has since died and it is stated that only two instalments out of rs. 500 allowed to her have been paid. the question is what happens to the balance. obviously had the mother not been alive, the entire money would have been paid to the widow and her sons. the special provision came to be made because the mother was shown.....
Judgment:

Sanjeeva Rao Nayudu, J.

1. This is an appeal against the order of the Additional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Andhra), Madras, directing the distribution of the compensation allowed to the dependants of the deceased workman N. Narayana Rao. While giving Rs. 3,000 to the widow of the deceased workman on her own behalf and on behalf of her two minor children, a sum of Rs. 500 was given to the mother of the deceased workman Srimathi Jogamma, respondent in this application.

2. The contention of the appellants is that as the mother is dependent on her other two sons, she should not have been allowed any compensation. It is unnecessary for me to go into this question as once it is granted that the mother is a dependant on the workman it is immaterial whether she had other means of income or not. The order of the Additional Commissioner awarding compensation to the mother is an order that cannot be questioned.

3. But the point that now arises is this ; The mother has since died and it is stated that only two instalments out of Rs. 500 allowed to her have been paid. The question is what happens to the balance. Obviously had the mother not been alive, the entire money would have been paid to the widow and her sons. The special provision came to be made because the mother was shown as a dependant. Since there is no longer any need for continuing the allowance in favour of the mother, she having died, the amount that is left over out of the amount of Rs. 500 awarded to her as compensation, must he deemed to have reverted back to the remaining dependants, the widow and the two minor sons, who would certainly have been entitled to this money as well, but for the existence of the mother at the time. The only proper order in the circumstances to make is that the amount remaining unpaid out of the share allotted to the mother should be transferred to the account of the widow and her two minor sons, and add it to the total amount to be paid over to the widow as per the arrangement made by the learned Additional Commissioner.

4. In the circumstances, the appeal is allowed to this extent, but in the entire circumstances of the case I make no order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //