IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUSAPPEAL No.634 of 2012 Appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, aggrieved by the order dated 05.09.2008, passed in WC No. 14 of 2005 of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Tirupati, Chittoor District. Between; 1. The Chief General Manager, Southern Power Distribution Company of A.P., Hyderabad. 2. The Superintending Engineer, Southern Power Distribution Company of A.P Limited, Tirupati, Chittoor District. 3. The Deputy Engineer, Southern Power Distribution Company of A.P Limited, Puttur, Chittoor District. 4. The Additional Deputy Engineer, Southern Power Distribution Company of A.P Limited, Karveti Nagaram, Puttur, Chittoor District. 5. The Assistant Engineer, Southern Power Distribution Company of A.P Limited, Vedurukuppam, Chittoor District. ...Appellants/Opposite Parties 2 to 5 AND 1. Smt. P. Rohini, W/o. Late P. Bhulokam, aged about 24 years, R/o. Guttakindapalle, Penumur Mandal, Chittoor District. ¥ 2. P. Gowthami, D/o. Late P. Bhulokam, aged about 06 years, Minor, rep. by Mother i.e.. Respondent No.1, R/o. Guttakindapalle, Penumur Mandal, Chittoor District. 3. P. Hemanth, D/o. Lte P. Bhulokam, aged about 04 years. Minor, rep. by Mother i.e., Respondent No.1, R/o. Guttakindapalle, Penumur Mandal, Chittoor District. 4. P. Venkatesu, F/o. Late P. Bhulokam, aged about 57 years, R/o. Guttakindapalle, Penumur Mandal, Chittoor District. 5. P. Pedapapa, W/o. P. Venkatesu, aged about 52 years, R/o. Guttakindapalle, Penumur Mandal, Chittoor District. ...Respondents/Applicants 6. P. Devarajulu Naidu, aged about 47 years. Electricity Contractor, R/o. D.No. 6-8-1057, NGO's Colony, Tirupati, Chittoor District. ...Respondent/1 Opposite Party (R6 is dismissed for default vide C.O.Dt.30/11/2011) I.A. NO: 3 OF 2009tCMAMP. NO: 1450 OF 2009) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased stay the order of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Tirupathi, passed in WC.No.14 of 2005 dated 5-9-2008. Counsel for the Appellants: SRI VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA Counsel for the Appellants : SRI O MANOHER REDDY Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 5: SRI MEHERCHAND NORI Counsel for Respondent No.6: None Appeared The Court made the following order: APHC010400362012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY ri\/ii miscellaneous APPEAL NO: 634/2012 [3460] THE Between: The Chief General Manager and 4 Others AND ...APPELLANT(S) ...RESPONDENT(S) Smt P Rohini and 5 Others Counsel for the Appellant(S); 1 .VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA SC FOR APSPDCL 2.0MANOHER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.MEHERCHAND NORI The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL N0.634 of 2012 JUDGMENT: The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 30 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 questioning the Order dated 05.09.2008 in W.C.No.14 of 2005 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Tirupati, Chittoor District. 1. 2. O.P.Nos.2 to 6 are the Appellants herein. 3. The facts leading to filing of the present appeal are as follows:- The claim application was filed by the widowed wife and two minor children of one P. Bhulokam (hereinafter referred to as ‘‘deceased’) along with his parents. The deceased was working as a Line Man under O.P.Nos.1 to 6. While so, on 08.10.2003 when the deceased went to Vedurukuppam S.T. Colony at about 4.30 p.m. for fixing an electric cable and on the assurance given by the agent of O.P.No.1 by name K. Gopal, the deceased climbed the pole and while pulling the cable, the subordinates of O.P.Nos.2 to 6, knowing the wire pulling work, carelessly gave electrical energy to the line, on which the deceased was working. The deceased immediately suffered electrocution and sustained serious burnt injuries all over his body and fell down from the electric pole. Immediately, the deceased was shifted to SVRRGG Hospital, Tirupati and thereafter to General Hospital, Madras and then to K.M.G. Hospital at Kurnool, where he succumbed to his injuries on 15.12.2003 while undergoing treatment. A case was registered as Cr.No.61 of 2003 by the Vedurukuppam Police Station regarding the said incident. As the 2 forward for any settlement, the claim filed seeking compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- opposite parties did not come application was considering the income and age of the deceased. 4. A counter was filed on behalf of the Respondent No.5 denying the ground that the deceased was not engaged for the claim on doing any work as alleged and there is no contract between O.P.Nos.2 to 6 and the deceased. the basis of the pleadings, the Commissioner framed the 5. On following issues for consideration:- workman as per the 1) Whether the deceased was a provisions of Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 and he met out of and in the course of his with an accident arising employment resulting into death? 2) What was the age of deceased at the time of accident? 3) What were the wages paid to the deceased at the time of accidental death? 4) What is the Quantum of compensation payable to the applicants? 5) Who are liable to pay the compensation to the applicants? 6. The wife of the deceased i.e. Claimant No.t examined herself her behalf i.e. Certified A.W.1 and got marked Exs.A.1 to A.8 on copy of F.l.R in Crime as No.61 of 2003 of Vedurukuppam P.S. of Post-mortem Report, dated Chittoor District, Certified copy of Inquest Report, dated 16.04.2003 16.04.2003, Certified copy Death Certificate of deceased Bhulokam, dated 15.12.2003, Certified 3 copy of Charge Sheet, dated 15.12.2003 and Statement of Sri P. Eswaraiah, brother of deceased, dated 15.12.2003, Legal notice to opposite parties, dated 18.12.2004 and Reply dated 24.12.2007 issued by opposite parties respectively. The Claimant No.1 reiterated her averments in the claim application and that the deceased was the only bread winner of her family. 7. The mother of the deceased by name Smt. Pedha Papa was examined as A.W.2 and co-employee of the deceased by name K. Gopal was examined as A.W.3. A.W.3 deposed that he was an eye witness to the entire incident and that O.P.No.1 was authorized on behalf of O.P.Nos.2 to 6 to lay electricity wires in their jurisdiction. One G. Nagaraju was also examined as A.W.4, who was also said to be the eye witness to the incident. 8. 9. On behalf of the opposite parties, no evidence was let in. The Commissioner taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence on record awarded compensation of Rs.3,68,747/- by taking into consideration the age of the deceased and the wages that were being paid to him. O.P.Nos.1 to 6 were made jointly and severally liable for compensation. Hence, the present appeal is filed by O.P.Nos.2 to 6. 10. 11. As the notice to Respondent No.6 i.e. O.P.No.1 was not served, this Court on 30.11.2011 passed the following order;- “The learned counsel for the appellant/s is/are permitted to take out fresh personal notice to the concerned respondents to the correct address by registered post with acknowledgment due or by 4 courier service and file proof of service within six (6) weeks, failing which, the appeal stands dismissed as against whom the notice is to be served and also for non-prosecution. Further, if any of the respondents or the parties died, the appellant/s is/are directed to bring the legal representatives on record, within six (6) weeks, failing which, the appeal stands abated and liable for dismissal for non-prosecution. If any parties are necessary parties and notice is not necessary, a memo to be filed to that effect for recording the same. ” As the above peremptory order was not complied with, the appeal was dismissed against Respondent No.6 i.e. Contractor as per the endorsement by the Registry. No application was filed seeking to set aside the default order. 12. As the appeal stood dismissed against the Respondent No.6, no favourable order can be passed in the appeal. Apart from that, on the merits of the case, no explanation is forthcoming from the Appellants as to in what capacity the deceased climbed the electric pole and in what capacity he was doing the repairs. There is no evidence let at their instance and the Contractor/0.P.No.1 remained ex parte. The eye witnesses i.e. A.Ws 3 & 4 categorically deposed about the incident, which was also registered as a case in Cr.No.61 of 2003. 13. Even assuming that the deceased was not a regular employee, but as he was discharging the work of the Appellants through O.P.No.1/Contractor, the Appellants would still be liable to pay compensation being the principal employers in terms of Section 12 of the Act. 14. 5 In a similar fact scenario, this Court in C.M.A.No.718 of 2010, dated 07.02.2025 after referring to the Judgment of the Delhi High Court in M/s. Hadiso Construction Pvt. Ltd., & Anr. vs. Commissioner Employees Compensation & Ors.,^ held that the principal employer would be liable to pay compensation. Therefore, this Court does not find any merit in the appeal and C.M.A is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 15. 16. Since the accident had happened in the year 2003 and considering the time gap of 22 years, the State Legal Services Authority shall ensure that the compensation is paid to the Claimants directly into their Aadhar linked bank account at the earliest. The Registry is directed to mark a copy of this order to the State Legal Services Authority. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. 17. 18. 1 2017 see OnLINE Del 12514 Sd/- E KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR p SC- //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER 1. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Tirupati, Chittoor District, (with records if any) 2. One CC to Sri Venkata Rama Rao Kota, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri Meherchand Nori, Advocate [OPUC] 4. The Member Secretary, Andhra Pradesh State Legal Services Authority H.No.2-273/54-A, BSR Complex, Opposite to Traffic Police Station, Near A.P. Secretariat, Malkapuram Village, Thulluru Mandal Guntur District-522238, Amaravati, Andhra Pradesh. 5. The Section Officer, V.R Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh Amaravathi. (to dispatch the trial court records) 6. Three CD Copies To at TK vna HIGH COURT DATED:18/02/2025 JUDGMENT CMA.No.634 of 2012 S’” 2 5 m 2025 J Cuffen» a«#iw>n Ni^oesp^^TCV'^.i^ DISMISSING THE C.M.A. WITHOUT COSTS