MUKESH vs SACHIN

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 10th November, 2025 Judgment pronounced on: 13th November, 2025 + W.P.(C) 6733/2018 & CM APPL. 25613/2018 MUKESH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Prashant Kumar Mittal, Advocate. versus SACHIN .....Respondent Through: Mr. Prem Kumar, Advocate for R-1 and Mr. K.P. Mavi, Advocate for R-2 along with Mr. Arvind Kumar Bansal, SSO, ESIC. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA JUDGMENT CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA, J. 1. The present writ petition is directed against order dated 24.10.2017 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Commissioner, Employees’ Compensation, District North-West, GNCTD in Case No. WC1/100/NW/16/622 under the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 (the EC Act), whereby compensation of ₹7,64,506/- Signature Not Verified Signed By:RAJ BALA W.P.(C) 6733/2018 Page 1 of 6 Signing Date:13.11.2025 15:17:35 with interest @12% p.a. from 26.09.2016 was awarded to respondent no.1(claimant). The petitioner herein (management) has also been directed to show cause as to why penalty under Section 4A(3)(b) of the Act should not be imposed for failure to deposit the compensation within one month from the date it became due. 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows-respondent no.1/ claimant, aged 18 years was employed in the petitioner’s factory unit. On 19.04.2016, while operating a moulding machine, it malfunctioned, as a result of which his left hand was crushed, resulting in an amputation below the wrist. 2.1 The claimant/respondent was initially taken to the ESI Hospital and later referred to Safdarjung Hospital. He subsequently underwent further surgery in his native village at Hi- Tech Ortho & Trauma Centre, Laheriasarai, Bihar. The documents placed on record before the Commissioner included FIR No. Signature No