Carpenter Cannot Be Classified As Unskilled Worker: Apex Court While Enhancing Motor Accident Compensation

The Supreme Court has held that a carpenter cannot be regarded as an unskilled worker while deciding an appeal seeking enhanced compensation in a motor accident claim case.

The case involved a carpenter who lost his right hand in a motor vehicle accident in 2014. In the absence of documentary proof of income, the Court relied on the minimum wages notified for skilled workers to determine compensation.

The Bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Manmohan rejected the argument that minimum wages for unskilled workers should apply, holding, "A carpenter is someone skilled in constructing objects with wood, requiring precision and expertise. It would be unfair to classify a carpenter as an unskilled worker."

"A normal person who is not trained in the craft certainly cannot undertake these activities with the level of precision that is required. It would be unfair then, to classify a carpenter as an unskilled worker," the Bench added.

During the hearing, Advocate Varun Mishra appeared for the Petitioner, and AOR Anas Tanwir appeared for the Respondent.

The Bench referred to the Apex Court’s judgment in State of Orissa v. Adwait Charan Mohanty (1995), which recognized carpentry as an artisanal trade requiring skill. It also cited Neeta v. Maharashtra SRTC (2015), where carpentry was acknowledged as a skilled job.

Based on the minimum wages for skilled workers issued by the Office of the Labour Commissioner, Punjab, the Court enhanced the compensation awarded to the appellant to Rs. 15,91,625. This marked a significant increase from the Rs. 8,26,000 fixed by the High Court and the Rs. 6,83,982 initially awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal.

Conclusion

"That being the case, the minimum wages as applied to skilled persons is to be taken for the purpose of calculation of compensation, as on the relevant date would be Rs.8337.10.The appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms. The award of the Tribunal as modified by the High Court is further modified in terms of the Final Compensation column above. Pending Applications, if any, shall stand disposed of," the Court ordered.

Cause Title: Karmajit Singh v. Amandeep Singh & Anr. [Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 27556/2023]

Appearance:-

Petitioner: Advocates Varun Mishra, Amit Kumar, Rochak Kharbanda, Dr. Raj Kumar Jain, Dr. O.P. Kharbanda, Sanpreet Singh Ajmani (AOR)

Respondent: Advocates Anas Tanwir (AOR), Ebad Ur Rahman, Md. Asif Abbas, Zainab Shaikh, Nazish Fatima, Kashif Jamal, Shivam Singh, Subham Janghu, Gopal Singh

Click here to read/download the Order