LexStreakRead free →
Madras High Court· 21 July 2026

Under the Employees' Compensation Act, 1954, does a heart attack suffered by a workman on night shift duty amount to an accident arising out of and in the course of employment?

The Chief General Manager, M/s.NLC India Limited, Mine - 1A, Neyveli v. 1. Smt.M.Latha, W/O.Late Mayavan, C-6, Eluthalar St, Block 9, Kurinjipadi Taluk, Neyveli, Cuddalore District-607 801
2026:MHC:3063 · CMA.No.1556 of 2022
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow s.3(1) Employees' Compensation A…📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

Yes. The word 'accident' under Section 3(1) includes a heart attack, being an untoward event not expected or designed, and where the workman was engaged in the duties of employment at the place of performance and the immediate act was not remote from the sphere of his duties, the death is attributable to an accident in the course of employment.

Headnote

Employees' Compensation Act, 1954 — s.3(1) — s.30 — Accident arising out of and in the course of employment — Death due to heart attack during night shift — Employees' Compensation Act, 1954 — s.3(1) — Accident — Meaning and test — Held: The expression "accident" under s.3(1) of the Act denotes an untoward event not expected or designed, and includes a heart attack brought about by the condition of the workman himself provided it was not designed by him; the test is whether the workman was engaged in the duties of employment at the place of performance and the immediate act was not so remote from the sphere of duties as to be foreign to them. (¶14, 16) Employees' Compensation Act, 1954 — s.3(1) — Causal connection — Stress and strain leading to heart attack — Held further: Where the deceased was on night shift duty in a mine and found unconscious after working through the night, and there is no material to show he suffered from any pre-existing disease or condition, a finding that the stress and strain of the work led to the heart attack establishes the requisite causal connection between the death and the employment. (¶10, 11, 15) Employees' Compensation Act, 1954 — s.3(1) — s.3(4) — Appellate interference — Perversity standard — Held further: A finding of the Employees' Compensation Commissioner attributing death to work-related stress and strain, where all ingredients of the causal-connection test are satisfied, does not suffer from perversity warranting interference in appeal under Section 30, and the employer remains liable to pay compensation under Section 3(4). Appeal dismissed. (¶15, 18)

In the Court's own words
Paragraph 14The expression “accident” according to P.Ramanatha Aiyar’s Advance Law Lexicon Dictionary means ‘undesigned, sudden or unexpected event; mishap; misfortune; disaster’. The word ‘accident’ is derived from the Latin verb ‘accidere’ signifying “fall upon, befall, happen, chance”. In other words, it is a sudden and unexpected event taking place without expectation upon the instant, rather than something which continues, progresses or develops; something happening by chance not according to usual course of things or events, out of the range of ordinary calculations; that which exits or occurs abnormally, or an uncommon occurrence.
Paragraph 14The above judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court succinctly brings out the meaning of the word ‘accident’ and as to how it must be construed qua the claim made under the Workmen’s Compensation Act/Employees’ Compensation Act. It was held that in order to bring out a case under Section 3(1) of the Act, it must be established that the workman was engaged in the duties of his employment, that the accident occurred at the place where he was performing those duties and that the immediate act, which led to the accident, was not so remote from the sphere of his duties so as to be regarded as something foreign to them.
Acts & Sections
s.3(1) Employees' Compensation Act, 1954s.3(4) Employees' Compensation Act, 1954s.30 Employees' Compensation Act, 1954

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of The Chief General Manager, M/s.NLC India Limited, Mine - 1A, Neyveli v. 1. Smt.M.Latha, W/O.Late Mayavan, C-6, Eluthalar St, Block 9, Kurinjipadi Taluk, Neyveli, Cuddalore District-607 801 — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
What must be established to prove a causal connection between a heart attack and the work under Section 3(1) of the Employees' Compensation Act, where the deceased has no prior history of disease?Can an appellate court under Section 30 of the Employees' Compensation Act interfere with the Commissioner's finding that stress and strain caused a heart attack during employment?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Madras High Court. Corrections