Notice, Claim and Medical Examination

Three provisos fix the date of the accident in disease cases, and they are the part most often asked about because a disease has no single moment.

The third proviso is the humane one. A worker who leaves an employment and only then develops the disease it gave him is not shut out, provided the symptoms appear within two years of leaving.

Section 82(2): when want of notice does not matter

The want of, or any defect or irregularity in, a notice shall not be a bar to entertaining a claim in two cases:

(a) A death on or near the workplace. Where the claim is for the death of an employee resulting from an accident which occurred on the employer's premises, or at any place where the employee was at the time working under the control of the employer or of a person employed by him, and the employee died on those premises or at that place, or on any premises belonging to the employer, or died without having left the vicinity of the premises or place where the accident occurred.

(b) The employer already knew. Where the employer, or any one of several employers, or any person responsible to the employer for the management of any branch of the trade or business in which the injured employee was employed, had knowledge of the accident from any other source at or about the time when it occurred.

The proviso, and it covers both requirements. The competent authority may entertain and decide any claim notwithstanding that the notice has not been given, or the claim has not been preferred in due time, if satisfied that the failure was due to sufficient cause.

Read the proviso carefully, because it is wider than section 82(2) itself. Section 82(2) forgives defects in notice in two defined situations. The proviso forgives both the absence of notice and the lateness of the claim, in any case, on proof of sufficient cause. It is the provision to cite whenever a problem question turns on a missed deadline.

Section 82(3) to (5): the mechanics of notice

Section 82(3), contents and on whom served. Every notice shall give the name and address of the person injured, state the cause of the injury and the date on which the accident happened, and be served on:

• the employer; or
• any one of several employers; or
• any person responsible to the employer for the management of any branch of the trade or business in which the injured employee was employed.

Section 82(4), the notice-book. The appropriate Government may require any prescribed class of employers to maintain at their premises a notice-book, in the prescribed form, readily accessible at all reasonable times to any injured employee employed on the premises and to any person acting bona fide on his behalf.

Section 82(5), how notice may be served. By delivering it at, or sending it by registered post addressed to, the residence or any office or place of business of the person to be served; or where possible, electronically; or, where a notice-book is maintained, by entry in the notice-book.

The notice-book is the practical answer for an injured worker: an entry in it is service. And section 82(5) now expressly allows electronic service, which the 1923 Act did not.

Section 83: accidents outside India

Section 83(1), who it covers. Four classes of employee:

• (a) masters of ships or seamen;
• (b) captains and other members of the crew of aircraft;
• (c) persons recruited by companies registered in India and working as such abroad;
• (d) persons sent for work abroad along with motor vehicles registered under the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, as drivers, helpers, mechanics, cleaners or other employees.

Section 83(2), on whom notice and claim are served, as if that person were the employer:

The proviso. Where the accident happened and the disablement commenced on board the ship or aircraft, no notice of the accident need be given at all by a seaman or a member of the crew.

Section 83(3), the time for the claim, which differs from section 82(1):

• (a) on the death of such an employee, one year after the news of the death has been received by the claimant;
• (b) where the ship or aircraft has been or is deemed to have been lost with all hands, eighteen months of the date on which it was or is deemed to have been lost.

The proviso again allows the competent authority to entertain a claim out of time for sufficient cause.

Section 83(4), evidence taken abroad. Where an injured employee is discharged or left behind in any part of India or in a foreign country, depositions taken by a Judge or Magistrate there, or by a Consular Officer in the foreign country, and transmitted to the Central or a State Government, are admissible in evidence if:

• (a) the deposition is authenticated by the signature of the Judge, Magistrate or Consular Officer;
• (b) the defendant or accused had an opportunity, by himself or his agent, to cross-examine the witness; and
• (c) where made in a criminal proceeding, on proof that it was made in the presence of the accused.

It is not necessary to prove the signature or official character of the person who signed, and a certificate by that person as to cross-examination and presence is sufficient evidence unless the contrary is proved.

Section 83(5). No half-monthly payment is payable for a period during which the owner of the ship is liable under merchant shipping law to defray the expenses of maintenance of the injured master or seaman.

Section 83(6). Failure to give notice, make a claim or commence proceedings in time is not a bar if proceedings are commenced within one month from the date on which the certificate of the State Government to that effect was furnished to the person commencing them.

Section 84: medical examination

Section 84(1), the duty to submit. Where an employee has given notice of an accident, he shall, if the employer before the expiry of three days from service of the notice offers to have him examined free of charge by a medical practitioner, submit himself for that examination. An employee in receipt of a half-monthly payment shall, if so required, submit himself from time to time.

The proviso. He shall not be required to submit himself at more frequent intervals than the State Government prescribes.

Section 84(2), refusal or obstruction. If an employee, required by the employer under sub-section (1) or by the competent authority at any time, refuses to submit himself or in any way obstructs the examination, his right to compensation shall be suspended during the continuance of the refusal or obstruction, unless in the case of refusal he was prevented by sufficient cause.

Section 84(3), leaving the area. If, before the period within which he is liable to be required to submit himself expires, he voluntarily leaves the vicinity of the place in which he was employed without having been examined, his right to compensation is suspended until he returns and offers himself.

The proviso is a real protection. Where the employee proves before the medical practitioner that he could not submit himself due to circumstances beyond his control and was also handicapped in communicating that in writing, the medical practitioner may, after recording the reasons in writing, condone the delay, and his right to compensation revives as if no suspension had been made.

Section 84(4), death during suspension. Where an employee whose right is suspended dies without having submitted himself, the competent authority may, if he thinks fit, direct the payment of compensation to the dependants.

Section 84(5), the effect of suspension. No compensation is payable for the period of suspension; and if the suspension begins before the waiting period in section 76(4)(ii) expires, the waiting period is increased by the period of suspension.

Suspension is not forfeiture. The right is held in abeyance and revives when the refusal or absence ends, and section 84(4) lets the authority pay the dependants even where the employee died while suspended.

A worked example

Farooq is injured by a machine on 3 March 2026. He tells nobody formally, but the shift supervisor saw it happen and took him to hospital.

Has he given notice? No formal notice. But section 82(2)(b) provides that want of notice is not a bar where the employer, or a person responsible to the employer for the management of a branch of the business, had knowledge of the accident from any other source at or about the time it occurred. The supervisor's knowledge answers that.

By when must he claim? Within two years of the accident, so by 3 March 2028: section 82(1).

He claims on 1 June 2028, three months late, because he was in hospital and then in his village. The proviso to section 82(2) allows the competent authority to entertain the claim notwithstanding that it was not preferred in due time, if satisfied the failure was due to sufficient cause. A long hospitalisation is the paradigm case.

Change the facts. Farooq is killed by the machine on the employer's premises and dies there. Section 82(2)(a) applies: want of notice is not a bar where the claim is for a death resulting from an accident on the employer's premises and the employee died there. His dependants have two years from the date of death.

Change them again. Farooq contracts a disease covered by section 74(3), and is off work from 10 April 2026. By the first proviso to section 82(1), the accident is deemed to have occurred on the first of the days of continuous absence, that is 10 April 2026, and the two years run from then.

And if the disease disables him only partially and he keeps working? By the second proviso, the two years are counted from the day he gives notice of the disablement to his employer.

And if he had left that employment and symptoms appeared eighteen months later? By the third proviso, the accident is deemed to have occurred on the day the symptoms were first detected, provided they appeared within two years of the cessation of employment.

Now the medical examination. Farooq gives notice on 5 March. The employer offers a free examination on 7 March.

Must he attend? Yes. The offer was made before the expiry of three days from service of the notice, so section 84(1) obliges him to submit himself.

He refuses because he distrusts the doctor. His right to compensation is suspended during the continuance of the refusal, unless he was prevented by sufficient cause: section 84(2). Distrust is unlikely to be sufficient cause.

He instead goes home to his village without being examined. His right is suspended until he returns and offers himself: section 84(3). But if he proves before the medical practitioner that he could not attend for circumstances beyond his control and was handicapped in communicating that in writing, the practitioner may condone the delay in writing and his right revives as if there had been no suspension.

He dies while suspended. The competent authority may, if he thinks fit, direct payment of compensation to his dependants: section 84(4).

What this does NOT mean

The two year period is not absolute. The proviso to section 82(2) lets the competent authority entertain a late claim for sufficient cause.

Notice is not always required. Section 82(2) forgives its want in two situations, the proviso forgives it generally for sufficient cause, and the proviso to section 83(2) dispenses with it entirely where a seaman or air crew member was injured on board.

Notice need not go to the employer personally. Section 82(3) permits service on any one of several employers or on a person responsible to the employer for the management of a branch.

Suspension under section 84 is not forfeiture. The right revives, and section 84(4) allows payment to dependants even where the employee died suspended.

The employer cannot demand endless examinations. The proviso to section 84(1) limits the frequency to what the State Government prescribes, and the examination must be free of charge.

Limits and criticism

Two years is short for a disease. Although the three provisos to section 82(1) work hard to fix a sensible starting point, a disease with a long latency may produce symptoms more than two years after the employment ends, and the third proviso then does not help.

"Sufficient cause" is undefined, so the most important escape in the section depends entirely on the competent authority's view.

Section 84(2) suspends the right on refusal without requiring the employer to show that the examination was reasonable in the circumstances.

Section 83(3)(a) runs from when the news of the death was received by the claimant, which is fair, but it gives one year rather than the two allowed by section 82(1).

Quick revision

• Section 82(1): notice as soon as practicable, and claim within two years of the accident, or of the death. Disease: the accident is deemed to occur on the first day of continuous absence; for partial disablement without absence, two years run from notice of the disablement to the employer; for symptoms appearing within two years of leaving that employment, from the day the symptoms were first detected.
• Section 82(2): want or defect of notice is no bar (a) where the employee died on or near the employer's premises, or (b) where the employer or a branch manager knew of the accident from another source at or about the time. Proviso: the authority may entertain a claim despite no notice or lateness, for sufficient cause.
• Section 82(3) to (5): notice states name and address, cause of injury and date; served on the employer, any one of several, or a branch manager; by delivery, registered post, electronically where possible, or entry in the notice-book.
• Section 83: seamen, air crew, persons recruited by Indian companies working abroad, and persons sent abroad with motor vehicles. Notice on the master, captain or local agent; no notice needed where the accident and disablement occurred on board. Claim within one year of news of the death, or eighteen months where the ship or aircraft was lost with all hands, extendable for sufficient cause. Depositions abroad admissible on three conditions.
• Section 84: employer may offer a free examination within three days of notice; refusal or obstruction suspends the right unless prevented by sufficient cause; leaving the vicinity suspends it until return, but a medical practitioner may condone in writing where circumstances were beyond the employee's control and he was handicapped in communicating; on death while suspended the authority may direct payment to dependants; no compensation for the suspension period, and the waiting period is extended by it.

Test yourself

1. State the two requirements in section 82(1) and the period for each. Notice of the accident must have been given as soon as practicable after it happened, and the claim must be preferred within two years of the occurrence of the accident, or, in the case of death, within two years from the date of death.

2. A worker gave no notice at all, but his supervisor witnessed the accident. Is his claim barred? No. Section 82(2)(b) provides that want of notice is not a bar where the employer, or any person responsible to the employer for the management of any branch of the trade or business, had knowledge of the accident from any other source at or about the time it occurred.

3. When is the accident deemed to occur where the employee contracts an occupational disease under section 74(3)? On the first of the days during which the employee was continuously absent from work in consequence of the disablement caused by the disease: first proviso to section 82(1).

4. A claim is filed six months late. Can it still be heard? Yes, if the competent authority is satisfied that the failure to prefer it in due time was due to sufficient cause: the proviso to section 82(2).

5. On whom is notice served where a seaman other than the master is injured, and when is no notice needed? On the master of the ship, as if he were the employer: section 83(2)(a). No notice of the accident need be given by a seaman or a member of an aircraft crew where the accident happened and the disablement commenced on board: the proviso to section 83(2).

6. What happens if an injured employee refuses a free medical examination properly offered? His right to compensation is suspended during the continuance of the refusal, unless he was prevented by sufficient cause from submitting himself: section 84(2). No compensation is payable for the period of suspension, and if it begins before the waiting period expires, that period is extended by it: section 84(5).

7. An employee whose right was suspended dies without being examined. Do his dependants get nothing? Not necessarily. Under section 84(4) the competent authority may, if he thinks fit, direct the payment of compensation to the dependants of the deceased employee.