JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA

NEW DELHI-1100025
FACULTY OF LAW

NAME: SYED AAMASH ALI

Sno.:49

COURSE AND BATCH: BA-LLB,

SELF- FINANCED (2026)

SEMESTER:FIFTH

PRESENTED TO: MR .Arif Wadood

TOPIC: NOTIONAL EXTENSION OF RIGHT TO COMPENSATION

Acknowledgement

I express my deep sense of respect and gratitude to my supervisor Mr.arif Wadood .

he created a friendly atmosphere, enlightened me with great ideas and Patiently
guided me. It was really a lifetime experience for me to work with him and I would
not be able to finish my work without his guidance, support, And direction. He is
epitome of knowledge and wisdom with his practical Work for my chosen project
problem, with his outstanding vision, crystal-clear thought process and razor-sharp
analytical approach; he had Evaluated my work with sheer pace and provided
invaluable inputs for Further work. I will be indebted throughout my life for his
guidance and Support.

Aamash ali
Introduction

Compensation is essentially a means of providing redress for damage or trouble suffered. In any
society, it is crucial to have some form of security in place to protect employees from the various
risks they may face due to their work, especially when they cannot address these risks with their
own resources. This assurance is typically in the form of compensation, serving as a safeguard
against the perils of employment. The Employee’s Compensation Act of 1923 is one of the earliest
legislative acts created to ensure that employees receive compensation 1.

In the case of Danjee v. Maung Hia Seen, 2a fundamental principle concerning compensation was
established. It was clarified that the Employee’s Compensation Act's 3 primary purpose is not to
offer solace or consolation to the employee but to adequately compensate them for the actual losses
they have incurred.

Now, a new legal framework, the Code on Social Security in 20202, is in the process of being
enacted. When implemented, it will address the liability of employers to provide compensation.
Section 2(15) of this Code on Social Security doesn't provide an exact definition of compensation
but rather refers to compensation as outlined in Chapter VII. It can be deduced that compensation
in this context pertains to rectifying the losses experienced by employees due to personal injuries
arising from their employment and leading to death or various levels of disability for specific
durations.

It's essential to note that compensation in labor law is distinct from damages in tort law. While in
tort law, defenses like "volenti non-fit injuria," "contributory negligence," "inevitable accident,"

1 https://blog.ipleaders.in/workmens-compensation-act-1923-theory-of-notional-extension-under-the-employees-
compensation-act/
2 Danjee v. Maung Hia Seen,( 2007) 1 scc 278
3 The Workmen compensation act,1923
and "negligence of co-workers" are available in legal proceedings, they do not apply in
compensation cases. In a relevant case, Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar, 4 the primary objective of
awarding damages is to fairly and reasonably rectify the actual losses incurred due to wrongful
actions. The court or tribunal is obligated to assess these damages objectively, removing any
assumptions or speculations. The compensation awarded must encompass physical injuries and
the loss experienced, including the inability to lead a normal life and enjoy usual amenities, as well
as the loss of earning capacity.

The concept of national extension

The social security system in India comprises a range of schemes and programs distributed across
various laws and regulations. This system aims to provide social security through mechanisms
such as insurance premium payments into government funds, pensions, gratuities, and other
employer responsibilities. One of the legislations designed to enhance employee social security is
the Employee’s Compensation Act of 1923. 5 These laws place an obligation on employers to
provide compensation to employees and their families in cases of work-related injuries.
Furthermore, in specific occupations, workers face the risk of contracting occupationally related
diseases, and these regulations also hold employers responsible for compensating employees in
such cases.

Section 3(1) of the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923, 6stipulates that when a workman sustains
a personal injury due to an accident arising from and during the course of employment, the
employer is obliged to pay compensation according to the provisions of this chapter. This
definition involves three key components: personal injury, accident, and the critical condition

4 Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar, (2011) 1 SCC 343

5 McCowan, Tristan. “Reframing the Universal Right to Education.” Comparative Education 46, no. 4 (2010): 509–25.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/25800021.
6 Workmen compensation act,1923, section 3(2)
“arising out of and in the course of the employment.” The last point is crucial and has significant
implications.7

With industrial advancements, job security for workers has become more precarious, leading to
the establishment of various social security legislations, including this Act. The judiciary has
recognized the Act’s purpose and has broadly interpreted its terms, giving rise to the doctrine of
notional extension. Defining “arising out of employment” precisely is challenging and has
prompted multiple attempts to establish a clear meaning. Factors like the nature, conditions,
objectives, and incidents of employment must be considered.

“In the course of employment” refers to activities associated with the work the employee is
employed to perform and any related incidental tasks. “Arising out of employment” implies that
the injury is a result of a risk inherent in the job’s duties. In essence, there must be a causal
relationship between the accident and the employment.

Several court cases have aimed to elucidate the meaning of “in the course of employment.” Based
on precedents and court judgments, determining whether an accident occurred in the course of
employment is usually straightforward when the injury takes place at the workplace, during
working hours, and while performing one’s duties. 8 Challenges arise when these elements do not
align, such as when an employee is injured near the workplace or on their way to work. This is
where the theory of notional extension comes into play.

Previously, it was commonly accepted that employment starts when an employee reaches the
workplace and ends as soon as they leave it. However, this notion has evolved due to the theory of

7 https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-10495-judicial-interpretation-of-the-term-arising-out-of-and-in-
the-course-of-employment.html
8 https://lawcorner.in/doctrine-of-notional-extension/#:~:text=The%20doctrine%20of%20notional%20ex
notional extension, which expands the time and place for considering an employee in the course
of employment. To decide if the employer is liable to provide compensation in such cases, a careful
examination of the specific circumstances is necessary.

The case of an employee who had an accident while commuting to work by bus illustrates this
concept. The court ruled in favor of compensation, stating that using the bus was an implied
condition to perform his duties efficiently and punctually. 9 In another instance, a worker was
instructed by the employer to clean a railway track at another location and died while crossing the
track on the return journey. The court considered this accident to have occurred in the course of
employment because the employer had directed the employee to a specific location.

However, there are exceptions to the doctrine of notional extension. When a workman is on a
public road or public place without fulfilling any work-related obligations, they are not entitled to
compensation if an accident occurs. 10 In such cases, the proximity to the workplace becomes
irrelevant. The key factor is whether the nature of the employment necessitates being in that
location.

In later cases, the apex court adopted a more liberal approach in interpreting the term “notional
extension” to align with the social welfare objectives of these legislations.

In summary, the doctrine of notional extension applies even if a workman has not reached the
workplace, entitling them to compensation when an accident occurs. 11 The judiciary has

9 https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-10495-judicial-interpretation-of-the-term-arising-out-of-and-in-
the-course-of-employment.html
1010 White, S. L. (1994). Color and Notional Content. Philosophical Topics, 22(1/2), 471–503.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/43154667
11 Menatti, L. (2017). Landscape: from common good to human right. International Journal of the Commons, 11(2),

641–683. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26522930
progressively expanded the scope of this doctrine through various judgments, serving the social
welfare interests of employees.

The most recent judgment from the Supreme Court further emphasized that the doctrine of notional
extension of employment is not restricted and applies when an accident happens in the workplace
without the employee’s choice. The judiciary continues to broaden the scope of this doctrine to
ensure the social welfare of employees.

India’s position

This passage discusses the concept of notional extension in India concerning compensation for
injured workers under the Employee State Insurance Act of 1948 and the Workmen Compensation
Act of 1923. It delves into the idea that traditionally, a worker was considered to be “working”
only when physically present at their workplace, with travel for work excluded from this definition.
However, it argues that the modern perspective has expanded to include workers traveling for job-
related purposes within the scope of employment.

The passage emphasizes that there is flexibility in both time and place when determining whether
an accident is work-related, 12even if it occurs away from the employee’s usual workplace. It also
highlights the importance of understanding the concept of “duty” in this context, which the court
has broadened to include any service or contract obligations that require the employer to bear the
associated costs.

A case example, "Weaver v. Tredegar Iron Coal Co.,” illustrates that the notion of “duty” has a
wider interpretation, acknowledging the social perspective. The course of employment cannot be

12Cook, K. S., & Hegtvedt, K. A. (1983). Distributive Justice, Equity, and Equality. Annual Review of Sociology, 9,
217–241. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2946064
restricted solely to the specific time and place of the work assigned. 13There is an understanding
that accidents can be considered work-related if they happen while an employee is on the way to
or from work, provided there is a binding agreement or contractual terms.

Section 3(2) of the Workmen Compensation Act of 1923 14is mentioned, specifying the contracting
of diseases during employment. It is clarified that if an employee contracts an occupational disease
peculiar to their employment during a continuous period shorter than what is specified in the
section, it can still be deemed an injury by accident within the meaning of the section if the disease
is proven to be caused during the course of employment.

The passage also discusses Section 2A, which outlines the liability of multiple employers in cases
where a worker contracts an occupational disease peculiar to their employment under more than
one employer. It suggests that notional extension is not explicitly addressed in either the Employee
State Insurance Act of 1948 15or the Workmen Compensation Act of 1923 and may need further
amendments.

Lastly, the passage mentions that if an accident occurs in a company-provided vehicle, regardless
of the location and time, it is considered an employment injury under the Employee Compensation
Act.

Nature and scope

The doctrine of notional extension is a concept that has theoretical, speculative, and hypothetical
aspects, often associated with imagining or extending the employment period of employees under
certain conditions for provisional benefits provided by employers. In simple terms, it’s a

13 Pandey, K. P. (1969). COMPENSABLE HARM UNDER WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION ACT, 1923—A COMPARATIVE
STUDY OF THE INDIAN AND ENGLISH DECISIONS. Journal of the Indian Law Institute
14 Workmen compensation act,1923, section 3(2)
15 The Employee State Insurance Act of 1948
hypothetical extension of employment for the purpose of providing benefits to employees in
specific situations.

The legal context of the doctrine of notional extension, found in Section 3 of the Workmen’s
Compensation Act, 1923, 16 pertains to the legal responsibility of employers to compensate
employees and their families in cases where injuries occur during work hours at the workplace.
17
This concept has evolved from Section 3 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, which is
now known as the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923.18

Section 3(1) of the Workmen’s Compensation Act19 establishes the employer’s liability to provide
compensation when a personal injury is caused to an employee due to an accident arising out of
and during the course of employment. 20

The scope of Section 3(1) of the Workmen’s Compensation Act is contingent upon showing that
the workman suffered personal injury due to an accident arising out of and in the course of
employment. When an accident takes place on the employer’s premises during work hours, it’s
relatively straightforward to conclude that it is linked to employment. However, complications
arise when an accident occurs on a public road without evidence connecting it to the nature of the
workman's employment, as anyone has the right to use public roads. Therefore, the general rule is
that a workman’s employment begins when they reach their workplace and ends when they leave
for home, unless it’s demonstrated that the nature of their employment required them to be
elsewhere.

16 Workmen compensation act,1923, section 3(1)

17 Cook, K. S., & Hegtvedt, K. A. (1983). Distributive Justice, Equity, and Equality. Annual Review of Sociology, 9,
217–241. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2946064
18 Menatti, Laura. “Landscape: From Common Good to Human Right.” International Journal of the Commons 11, no.

2 (2017): 641–83. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26522930.

19 Workmen compensation act,1923, section 3(1)
20 https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-10495-judicial-interpretation-of-the-term-arising-out-of-and-in-

the-course-of-employment.html
The doctrine of notional extension comes into play here, extending the concept of “in the course
of employment” to include situations where the workman hasn’t yet reached their workplace or
has already left the employer’s premises. This extension of meaning results from court
interpretations of Section 3(1). 21

It’s important to note that Section 2(8) of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 22also covers
personal injuries to employees caused by accidents or occupational diseases arising out of and
during the course of their employment, regardless of whether these incidents occur within or
outside the territorial limits of India.

Case laws23

In General Superintendent, Talchar Thermal Station v. Bijuri Naik 24

Case an employee had died
by heart attack at factory gate at the time of joining his duty. Orissa High Court judge personally
held that, in this case there is a notional extension at both entry and exit by time and space and the
scope of such extension will depend upon the facts of each case 25. An employment may end or
may begin not only when employee begins to work or leaves his tools but also when he uses the
means of exercise and egress to and from the place of employment.

In Union of India v. Mrs Noor Jahan 26case the deceased was employed as a gang man in the
Railways. 27During his duty hours he along with other gang man working with him, was a’ked to

21 supra
22 The Employees State Insurance Act, 1948, sec 2(8)
23 Burri, Thomas. “The Case-Law.” In The Greatest Possible Freedom: Interpretive Formulas and Their Spin in Free

Movement Case Law, 1st ed., 29–416. Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, 2015.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv941qt8.4.
24 1994 ACJ 1054
25 https://www.brillopedia.net/post/doctrine-of-notional-extension-theory-with-reference-to-case-laws
26 1995 (34) DRJ 214
27 Lyons, John. “Towards a ‘Notional’ Theory of the ‘Parts of Speech.’” Journal of Linguistics 2, no. 2 (1966): 209–36.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4174936.
shift to another site for clearing the same and doing other odd jobs in connection with the
Janmashtami celebration. On the way, he was knocked down by a lorry on the public Street and
died as a result of the accident. 28The Allahabad High Court in this case held that the accident had
been taken place in the duty time when the deceased was proceeding to discharge his duty at the
behest of employer at the second site. So, the accident has occurred in the course of employment
and arose out of employment so the claimant was entitled to compensation.

Exception to the Doctrine of Notional Extension

In case of General Manager Western Railway v. Chandra Bai the deceased was going to attend his
duty from his house. While doing so he met with an accident and died. It was held that the principle
of notional extension is applicable and accident can be said to have occurred in the course of
employment and thus the claimant was entitled to the compensation.

EXCEPTION TO THE DOCTRINE OF NOTIONAL EXTENSION

As right should not be unlimited they must have some limitations or restriction. As fundamental
right provided under part III of Indian constitution also have exceptions or limitations because
unlimited right can never serve the society in better way but unlimited rights only lead to sui
generis in the society. As well as there are many chances that these unlimited rights can help people
in violating the rights of others and misusing them. 29

Similarly, doctrine of notional extension also has some exception it also does not provide unlimited
benefit two workers. 30 And it is correct to large extent because there are many fraud cases in India
as well in which the victim himself has some fault and he claim compensation from the defendant
and such instances can be seen to very large extent in the duration of covid-19.31 As many people

28 https://indiankanoon.org/search/?formInput=notional%20extension%20theory
29 https://legal-wires.com/lex-o-pedia/study-notes-doctrine-of-notional-extension/
30 Lyons, J. (1966). Towards a “Notional” Theory of the “Parts of Speech.” Journal of Linguistics, 2(2), 209–236.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4174936
31 https://indiankanoon.org/search/?formInput=notional%20extension%20theory
die due to other diseases and their claim compensation on the basis that he or she dies due to side
effect of vaccine but here I am not getting into the covid cases but it is one example of fraud cases.
But not all cases are fraud.

Section 3(1) of Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 states about the employer’s liability for
compensation with its exceptions. The matter in section 3 with the regard to exception is –

As first exception to the doctrine of notional extension is that if any person does not suffer from
disability caused by injury during working hours for more than three days then the employer is not
liable to pay his employee.

Second exception is that employee does not liable if the employee is working in the condition of
intoxication and he suffered injury while working in that condition.

CONCLUSION

Certainly, the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, and the Employees Insurance Act, 1948, stand
as vital pillars in safeguarding the rights of employees by ensuring they receive due compensation
for injuries sustained during work. The doctrine of notional extension, as applied by courts in
various cases, has played a pivotal role in broadening the scope of what constitutes work-related
circumstances. However, like any double-edged sword, the doctrine carries both merits and
demerits. On the positive side, it enables a more inclusive approach to defining the meaning and
place of work. Nevertheless, its drawbacks become apparent with the surge in fraudulent claims,
giving rise to a concerning increase in fake cases. These deceitful instances not only undermine
the integrity of the compensation process but also act as a primary contributor to the extensive
delays in court proceedings. The protracted resolution times, often surpassing a decade, raise
critical concerns about the accessibility and timeliness of justice within the framework of these
legislative acts. Striking a balance between the advantages and challenges posed by the doctrine
of notional extension becomes imperative to ensure the effectiveness of these crucial pieces of
legislation in providing fair and swift compensation to deserving employees.
Bibliography

• Statutes
1. The Employees State Insurance Act, 1948,
2. Workmen compensation act,1923,

• Journals
1. Pandey, K. P. (1969). COMPENSABLE HARM UNDER WORKMEN’S
COMPENSATION ACT, 1923—A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE INDIAN
AND ENGLISH DECISIONS. Journal of the Indian Law Institute, 11(4), 430–479.
2. Burri, Thomas. “The Case-Law.” In The Greatest Possible Freedom: Interpretive
Formulas and Their Spin in Free Movement Case Law, 1st ed., 29–416. Nomos
Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, 2015..
3. Cook, K. S., & Hegtvedt, K. A. (1983). Distributive Justice, Equity, and Equality.
Annual Review of Sociology, 9, 217–241. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2946064
• Article
1. https://upscalelegal.com/employers-liability-for-
compensation/#:~:text=Notional%20extension%20of%20Employer’s%20Premises,work
place’s%20Doctrine%20of%20Notional%20Extension.
2. https://blog.ipleaders.in/workmens-compensation-act-1923-theory-of-notional-extension-
under-the-employees-compensation-act/
3. https://lawcorner.in/doctrine-of-notional-extension/
4. https://www.brillopedia.net/post/doctrine-of-notional-extension-theory-with-reference-to-
case-laws
5. https://www.owlgen.in/explain-the-theory-of-notional-extension-of-employment/