The Kerala High Court at Ernakulam on Monday, September 22, 2025, delivered an important ruling on whether families of deceased workers can pursue fresh compensation claims after settling before a Lok Adalat. The matter concerned the death of a quarry worker, and the parents of the victim had sought compensation under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, even after already receiving a sum through a Lok Adalat settlement.
Background
The appellants, Sivan and his wife Vimala, lost their son Ambady in January 2015 while he was operating a hydraulic lift in a quarry at Muvattupuzha. The lift belonged to quarry owner Raju P.V and was insured with Oriental Insurance Company.
Read also:- Supreme Court Upholds Telangana High Court’s Decision to Quash Bribery Case Against MLA in MLC Election Row
Initially, the couple had moved a Pre-Litigation Petition before the Muvattupuzha Taluk Legal Services Authority. On February 14, 2015, the matter was settled in the Lok Adalat, where they received ₹10 lakh. Later, they approached the Employees Compensation Commissioner seeking statutory compensation, which was assessed at ₹8,61,120. However, their claim was rejected on the ground that they had already settled the issue before the Lok Adalat.
Court's Observations
Hearing the appeal, Justice M.A. Abdul Hakhim considered whether dependents could re-approach the Commissioner after a Lok Adalat settlement. The appellants argued that Section 8(1) of the Employees Compensation Act prohibits employers from bypassing the Commissioner, and that payments made outside its framework cannot replace statutory compensation.
Read also:- Supreme Court Reduces Murder Conviction in 1986 Banda Land Dispute Case, Orders Release of Accused
Their counsel contended that -
"the very purpose of Section 8(1) would be defeated if families like the appellants are denied compensation merely because of a Lok Adalat award."
They relied on earlier Kerala High Court rulings that insisted employers must deposit compensation only with the Commissioner.
On the other side, the insurance company pointed out that the family had already accepted ₹10 lakh more than what the Commissioner himself had fixed. Their counsel argued that once a party chooses a remedy under the Legal Services Authorities Act, it cannot later pursue another under the Employees Compensation Act. Citing Supreme Court precedents, he stressed the doctrine of "election of remedies," meaning one cannot ride two horses at the same time.
Justice Hakhim noted the tension between the Employees Compensation Act and the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. While the former restricts direct settlements, the latter gives overriding powers to Lok Adalats.
"Once the dispute has been resolved in a Lok Adalat, which is also a judicial body, there is no question of undue influence or exploitation," the judge observed.
The bench further remarked,
"When dependents have already received compensation through the Permanent Lok Adalat, they cannot again resort to the Employees Compensation Act. The bar under Section 8(1) does not extend to settlements under Section 22C of the Legal Services Authorities Act."
Decision
Answering the legal questions in favour of the respondents, the court dismissed the appeal. Justice Hakhim concluded that the appellants, having already received a higher sum than the statutory compensation through Lok Adalat, were not entitled to reopen the claim.
The judgment reinforces the finality of Lok Adalat awards and clarifies that dependents of deceased workers cannot seek double compensation by approaching multiple forums.
Case Title:- Sivan & Anr. v. Raju P.V. & The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.
Case Number:- MFA (ECC) No. 27 of 2024
