Lakshmi and Others vs Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Commissioner Workmen's Compensation, Madras and Another

Liberhan, C.J.—The claim petition of the appellant petitioners under the Workmen''s Compensation Act has been dismissed solely on the ground of delay. The claimants are illiterates, widow and minor children of the deceased Class IV employees. Representations were made from time to time claiming compensation, though the procedural remedy was not sought by the claimants. Workmen''s Compensation Act is a social legislation and it is intended to benefit the poor illiterate worker. In a country which is abound with illiterate masses, it cannot be expected of a poor Class IV employee''s widow and minor children to seek appropriate remedy as provided by the law within the period of limitation. The object of the Limitation Act is to bring to an end stale claims and not to keep the Sword of Damocles hanging for indefinite period. It bars the remedy only, and not the right. We may hasten to add that if an illiterate party has been making his claim by putting representations to the respondents, who are expected to act as an ideal employer rather than relying on technicalities of procedure to deny or to consider the claim of the applicant-claimant on merits, denying the remedy solely on the ground of limitation, without construing the condonation liberally would by itself be frustrating the object of the Act.

Keeping in view the totality of the circumstances and in no form of opposition from the other side, we find that the cause for the delay, i.e. illiteracy, minority of the children, nature of the employment in its totality is sufficient to condone the delay, to substantial justice to the poor for whom, the very system was devised. The delay is condoned.

The writ appeals is allowed. The matter is remitted to the Workmen''s Compensation Authority to decide on merits, after granting an opportunity of hearing to both the parties, within six months.