| Case ID |
46498efe-675a-440d-8fea-ad96483a8e91 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Revision Application No. 35 of 1982 |
| Decision Date |
Dec 15, 1987 |
| Hearing Date |
Dec 15, 1987 |
| Decision |
The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, restoring the trial court's decree and allowing the claim for the insurance amount of Rs. 12,000. The court emphasized that the insurance policy obtained by the employer was in compliance with Section 10-B of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, which mandates that employers must insure permanent employees against natural death and disability. The court found that the respondent's repudiation of liability on technical grounds was in conflict with the statutory obligations of the employer under the Ordinance. The court highlighted that even if an employee was on sick leave at the time of the policy's commencement, it did not negate the employer's responsibility to cover that employee under the insurance policy. |
| Summary |
In the case of Revision Application No. 35 of 1982 before the Sindh High Court, the central issue revolved around the obligations of employers to insure their permanent workmen against natural death and disability as mandated by Section 10-B of the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968. The petitioner, CENTRAL MECHANICAL ENGINEERING CO. LTD., sought to recover an insurance claim for Rs. 12,000 following the death of a permanent employee, Ali Gohar, who had died shortly after the policy was obtained. The respondent, STATE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN, contested the claim, arguing that Ali Gohar was on sick leave at the time the policy commenced, and thus, was not covered under the insurance terms. However, the court found in favor of the petitioner, stating that the employer had fulfilled its statutory duty by obtaining the policy as required by law. The judgment emphasized the importance of ensuring that employees, regardless of their active duty status at the time of policy commencement, are protected under such insurance provisions. This case reinforces the critical role of statutory compliance in labor laws and the protection of workers' rights in Pakistan, particularly in terms of financial security for their families in the event of unforeseen circumstances. The ruling has significant implications for employers, ensuring they adhere strictly to their obligations regarding employee insurance, thereby safeguarding the welfare of their workforce. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
CENTRAL MECHANICAL ENGINEERING CO. LTD.,
STATE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN GROUP INSURANCE DEPARTMENT
|
| Judges |
AJMAL MIAN, J
|
| Lawyers |
Shaikh Haider,
Ibrahim Pishori
|
| Petitioners |
CENTRAL MECHANICAL ENGINEERING CO. LTD.
|
| Respondents |
STATE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN GROUP INSURANCE DEPARTMENT
|
| Citations |
1988 SLD 738,
1988 PLC 185
|
| Other Citations |
Ghulam Mustafa v. Trevor A. Robertson P L D 1966 Kar. 271,
E. A. Evans v. Muhammad Ashraf P L D 1964 SC 536,
Muhammad Siddique v. Sind Labour Appellate Tribunal P L D 1979 Kar. 560
|
| Laws Involved |
West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance, 1968,
Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923,
West Pakistan Employees' Social Security Ordinance, 1965
|
| Sections |
10-B
|