VIJAY BAHADUR SINGH & ANR vs EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION & ORS

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgement delivered on: 30.06.2025 + FAO 236/2013 and CM APPL. 45968/2019 VIJAY BAHADUR SINGH & ANR .....Appellants versus EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION & ORS .....Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case For the Appellants : Dr. M. Y. Khan, Adv. For the Respondents : Mr. K P Mavi, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA JUDGMENT TEJAS KARIA, J INTRODUCTION: 1. The present Appeal has been filed under Section 82 of the Employee State Insurance Act, 1948 („ESI Act‟) being aggrieved by the final order and judgment dated 09.04.2013 („impugned order‟) passed by the Employee State Insurance Court (‘ESI Court’) in Suit No. 03/2011 filed by the Appellants/Vijay Bahadur Singh and Raj Kumari, who are the parents of Mr. Sunil Kumar („the deceased‟). The impugned order holds that the death of the deceased was for reasons not connected with the Signature Not Verified Signed By:NEELAM FAO 236/2013 Page 1 of 12 SHARMA Signing Date:30.06.2025 19:14:09 employment and, therefore, there was no accident or an occupational disease arising out of and in the course of the employment. 2. By impugned order dated 09.04.2013, the learned ESI Court dismissed the suit of the Appellants with the finding that merely because the deceased was insured under the ESI Act and was residing at a place which was given to him as a temporary residence cannot be sufficient to maintain the claim of the Appellants within the provisions of the ESI Act. 3. The Appellants have assailed the impugned order on the ground that the learned ESI Court failed to consider the principle of notional extension by which the liability under the ESI Act is not limited to the physical workplace but extends beyond the workplace as long as a casual nexus can be drawn betwe