Rt1007b47 Home-work 1 Mgt107 Shashi 11004658 Law

8/7/2019 Rt1007b47 Home-work 1 Mgt107 Shashi 11004658 Law

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/rt1007b47-home-work-1-mgt107-shashi-11004658-law 1/7

SCHOOL: LOVELY INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT

TOPIC: 1. TO SOLVE THE QUESTIONS RELATED TO

FACTORY ACT 1948 & WORKMAN

COMPENSATION ACT.

DOA: 18.01.2011

DOS: 25.01.2011

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

MISS JATINDER KAUR NAME: SHASHI SHEKHAR

SECTION : T1007

ROLL NO. : B47

REG. NO. : 11004658

CLASS : B.B.A(LIM)



ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I have been fortunate enough to have a lot of people who helped me in

this assignment so I wish to acknowledge them all.

Firstly, really thankful to my parents who have encouraged me in

almost every aspects and supported me throughout this venture. I really want to

thanks my teachers and especially Miss Jatinder Kaur who helped me in this

assignment. She teaches with so much energy that it has created thirst in me for

the subject. I am also very thankful to my friends whose motivation was like a blessing during this endeavour.

Last but not the least; I am also very thankful to all my faculty

members of LIM as there support was the source of motivation for me

throughout.

Thanking you

Shashi Shekhar



INTRODUCTION

In this assignment we gave light on the 1948 Factories Act and

1923 Workmen’s Compensation Act.The first Factories act in India was passed in 1881. It was designed

primarily to protect children & to provide for some health, welfare & safety

measures. It was followed by new Acts in 1891, 1911, 1922 & 1934. The act of

1934 was passed to implement the recommendations of the Royal Commission

on labour in India & the conventions of the International Labour Organisation

the experience of the working of this act revealed a number of defects &

weakness which hampered effective administration of the act. Further, the

provisions of this Act regarding safety, health & welfare. The Factories Act,

1948 came into force on the 1st

day of April, 1949.Its object is to regulate theconditions of work in manufacturing establishments which come within the

definition of the term ‘factory’ as used in the act. The Act was substantially

amended in 1987. some provisions of the Amending Act came into force with

effect 1st December, 1987 & others from 1st June, 1988.

The passing of workmen’s Compensation Act in 1923 was the first

step towards social security of workmen. The main object of the act is to

provide for the payment of compensation by certain classes of employees to

their workmen for injury by accident. The theory of workmen’s compensation is

that “the cost of product should bear the blood of the workmen”. The Act cameinto force on the day of July, 1924[sec.1 (3)]. It extends to the whole of India

[sec.1 (2)]. The latest amendment to the Act was made in 1995.

Now we have to discuss on some cases of law related to factories

and its workers.



CASES AND SOLUTIONS

PART-A

1. Ram, Shyam and Manohar are working in factory ABC Ltd. Their

names were not entered in register; however they are getting all the wagesand allowance from the factory. One day ram met with accident. Can the

factory owner claim for the damages under group insurance.

Ans. No, the factory cannot claim for the damages under group insurance

because according the Factory Act 1948, the name, group and nature of the

work of the employee should be mentioned in the register of the factory. If this

condition fulfils in a factory then only the employee would be liable for the

damages.

2. Rajan met with an accident while working on machine in steel factory.

The nature of job was risky. Will the owner is guilty of offence.

Ans. Yes, the owner is guilty of offence because if the job of a worker in a

factory is risky then the owner should provide every kind of protection

equipments that are mentioned in the Factory Act. By which the employee

would be able to protect himself from any kind of accidents.

3. XYZ ltd. took a group insurance scheme for 100 workers with the

detailed list and with the hazardous processes. Now accident happens with

another cause which was not mentioned while taking insurance policy. Now

who is liable to pay insurance company or the factory owner.

Ans. The factory owner is liable because the accident happened with another

cause was not mentioned by the factory owner while taking insurance policy.

That’s why the factory owner is liable.

4. Kalpana was working in a factory for 60 hours on a weekly basis. She is

getting Rs. 20 per hour extra for the overtime. What is the status in the

eyes of law about the situation?

Ans. According to the Factory Act 1948 Sec 51 no adult is allowed to work

more than 48 hours in a week and 9 hrs. in a day, so Kalpana is not allowed to

work in a factory more than 48 hrs regularly.



5. Rajni was working in a factory from 10 am to 8 pm and she is getting Rs.

100 per day as wages and on time with the extra meal. Discuss is there any

violation under factories act, 1948.

Ans. Yes, there is a violation under the Factory Act 1948, because in this caseRajni was working for 10 hrs. which is not allowed by the law to work more

than 9 hrs. in a day for a woman.

PART-B

6. Rajbir was a wage earner in XYZ ltd and left the job on 25 October

2009. On 29 October 2009 he came in factory to clear all his dues, at that

time he met with accident with machine and lost his one leg. Does the

factory owner is liable to compensate.

Ans. No, the factory owner is not liable to compensate. Because according to

the Factory Act 1948 an employer is only liable to compensate for their

employer not for common person. Here in this case when Rajbir came on 29

October 2009 to clear all his dues he was no more employee in that factory as

he had left the job on 25 October 2009.

7. Mohan was a wage earner in ABC ltd. His timings were 8am to 6 pm. He

met with accident at 8 pm and lost his hand. Does the factory owner is

liable to compensate.

Ans. Yes, the factory owner is liable to compensate. According to The

Workman Compensation Act 1923 Sec 3(1) if personal injury caused to any

employee by accident arising out of or during the course of employment then

the employer would be liable.

8. Murari was working with cotton factory from last ten years. Because of

this type of working he lost his eyes. Is the employer is liable to pay anygratuity and compensation.

Ans. Yes, the employer is liable to pay any gratuity and compensation because

according to the workman compensation 1923 sec3(2) if any employee

contracts any of the disease during the occupation then the employee should be

compensate.



9. In the above question Murari is claiming further the monthly regular

pay for next 5 years from his factory owner. What is the legal status?

Ans. No, this is not a legal status. As according to the Workman Compensation

Act 1923, sec4(1)(b) in a permanent disablement of any employee, he will get-60% of monthly wages x relevant wages

100

10. Sohan was working in a power plant. One day he came drunk at plant

and died because of electric shock at plant. Is the factory owner liable to

pay compensation?

Ans. No, the factory owner is not liable to pay compensation because accordingto the Workman Compensation Act 1923, intoxication by drink is prohibited

during the course of employment. It is Sohan’s mistake for which factory owner

is not liable to pay any type of compensation.



REFRENCES

1. Kapoor, N.D, Elements of Mercantile Law, Sultan Chand and Sons,, NewDelhi, 30th Edition,2009

2. Individual subject teacher i.e. MISS JATINDER KAUR.

3. Friends & Class-mates

Date post:	09-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	shashishekhar24
View:	218 times
Download:	0 times

Rt1007b47 Home-work 1 Mgt107 Shashi 11004658 Law

Documents