Report No. 62
4.16. Section 9.- Section 9 provides as follows:
"Save as provided by this Act, no lump sum or half-monthly payment payable under this Act shall in any may be capable of being assigned or charged or be liable to attachment or pass to any person other than the workman by operation of law, nor shall any claim be set-off against the same."
The words "or pass to any person other than the workman" in section 9 seem to make a distinction between a workman and a non-workman. This gave rise to an argument in a Madras case1 to the effect that if a dependant who has become entitled to compensation dies before receipt of the amount, the amount lapses. The assumption was that the dependant was a non-workman. Fortunately the argument failed. But the matter requires examination. It may be mentioned that this section corresponds to a section of the (English) Workmen's Compensation Act,2 1925, which ran as follows:
"A weekly payment payable under this Act or scheme certified under this Act or a sum paid by way of redemption thereof, shall not be capable being assigned, charged or attached and shall not pass to any other person by operation of law nor shall any claim be set off against the same."
It will be noticed that the words "person other than the workman", which occur in our section 9 do not occur in the English Act, and therefore the emphasis on "non-workman" is not found in the English Act.
1. 1.M. Ahdurrahinan v. Nadakkhri M.B. Koya, AIR 1938 1 Mad 402.
2. Section 40, Workmen's Compensation Act, 1925 (English).
4.17. We are now recommending a provision1 whereunder, in case of death of the dependant, the amount will be subject to distribution amongst other dependants. Hence no clarification in section 9 is needed with reference to the question raised in the Madras case.2
1. See recommendation as to section 8(5), para. 4.13, supra.
2. Para. 4.16, supra.