PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

EFU LIFE INSURANCE LIMITED vs LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL S — 2022 PLC 162 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2022 PLC 162 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2022
Reporter
PLC
Parties
EFU LIFE INSURANCE LIMITED vs LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL S
Subject matter
Constitutional
Provisions referred to
S. 15---I; S. 122---C; Insurance Ordinance (XXXIX of 2000); Wages Act; Insurance Ordinance

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

EFU LIFE INSURANCE LIMITED VS LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL S.15---Insurance Ordinance (XXXIX of 2000), S. 122---Claims arising out of deductions from wages or delay in payment of wages and penalty for malicious or vexatious claims---Group insurance---Jurisdiction of Commissioner---Scope---Respondent, being widow of deceased employee, filed a claim against the Insurance Company before the Commissioner seeking payment of group insurance amount---Petitioner, being the insurance company, had issued the insurance policy at the request of the company for insurance of its employees---Each employee was assured a certain sum payable on death---Husband of respondent had passed away and resultantly a claim was filed before the petitioner which was repudiated on the ground that the husband of respondent was not in the active employment of the company, as such, the claim did not fulfill requirement of Cl. 4 of the insurance policy---Commissioner allowed the application of respondent---Labour Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal---Validity---General Manager of the company had stated that all the employees including the husband of respondent were insured with the petitioner company and that premium was also paid---Petitioner company had not cross-examined the said witness---Husband of respondent had passed away when the insurance policy was in existence---Petitioner company in its reply had admitted that the husband of respondent was insured by it under group insurance---Labour Appellate Tribunal was right in its observation that the claim for compensation under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, could only be decided by the Commissioner and that under the Insurance Ordinance, 2000, only a policy holder could approach the tribunal created thereunder---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2022 PLC

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English