Employees' Compensation Act Claim Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because Disability Certificate Was Issued By Non-Treating Doctor: Bombay HC

The Bombay High Court has held that an application for compensation under the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923, cannot be rejected solely on the ground that the disability certificate was issued by a doctor who did not attend to the injured workman. The Court observed that the Act only requires the certificate to be issued by a “qualified medical practitioner” and does not mandate that such a practitioner must have treated the injured.

Justice Jitendra Jain was hearing a First Appeal arising out of an order passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation rejecting the appellant's claim for compensation. The appellant was employed by Respondent No.1 at a construction site. While carrying out work, he fell and sustained back injuries and was admitted to Lok Hospital, where he remained till 29 March 2010. He thereafter filed an application seeking compensation of Rs. 5,95,584/- from the employer and the insurer. The Commissioner dismissed the application on the sole ground that the disability certificate relied upon by the applicant had been issued by a doctor who had not treated him, though the doctor had entered the witness box and deposed. On that basis, the Commissioner answered all issues, including the employer-employee relationship and the occurrence of an accident in the course of employment, against the applicant.

Examining Sections 4(1)(c)(ii) and Explanation II of the Act, the Court noted that compensation for permanent partial disablement is to be determined on the basis of loss of earning capacity assessed by a “qualified medical practitioner.” Section 2(1)(i) defines such a practitioner as one registered under the relevant medical laws. There is no provision in the Act requiring that the certificate be issued only by the doctor who treated the injured.

The Court observed that the purpose of obtaining a disability certificate is to secure expert assessment of loss of earning capacity. A qualified medical practitioner who did not treat the injured can assess disability on the basis of medical records and examination and can be subjected to cross-examination.

“… in the absence of any specific provision in the Act requiring disability certificate to be issued only by the doctor who has treated the injured reasoning of the Commissioner to reject application is not correct… merely because the doctor gave a medical certificate who did not attend the injured but entered the witness box after one year cannot be a ground for discarding and rejecting the whole claim,” the Court observed.

Therefore, the Court held that the approach of the Commissioner in rejecting the application was erroneous and the Commissioner ought to have considered the certificate issued by a doctor who did not treat the injured applicant, but was subjected to cross-examination and after considering the same, should have arrived at the disability percentage. The Court further noted that the Commissioner had erred in deciding unrelated issues such as employer-employee relationship and accident in the course of employment solely on the basis of the disability certificate.

Holding that the Commissioner's approach was erroneous, the High Court set aside the impugned order dated 19 June 2012.

Case Title: Mahendra Sabharu Majhi v. M/s. Mahalaxmi Enterprises & Anr. [First Appeal No. 1627 of 2012]

Click Here To Read/Download Order