AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B. Manohar, J. - The Oriental Insurance Company being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 30/9.2008 made in WCA/F/442/2007 passed by the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen''s Compensation, Bagalkot (hereinafter referred to as WCC''). filed this appeal.
First respondent herein filed a claim petition contending that son of the claimant Ramanna Jaggal was working as a Cleaner in lorry bearing No. KA-22/A- 7653, which belonged to the respondent No. 2 herein. On 23.10.2007 as per the instructions of owner of the lorry, he had been to Ultra Cement Factory, Ginigera. After unloading the slags he was sleeping near the lorry in the factory premises. At that time, a tipper bearing No. AP-16-TW-8702 came there and while parking the tipper, wheel of the tipper ran over the head and hand of Ramanna, due to which, he died on the spot. Immediately after the accident, driver of the lorry lodged a complaint before the jurisdictional Police. The Police have registered a case against the driver of the offending vehicle. The claimant contended that the accident occurred during the course and out of employment. The deceased was earning a sum of Rs. 4,000/- per month and getting batta of Rs. 20/- per day. In view of the death of Ramanna, the family has lost bread earner and hence sought for compensation.
In pursuance of notice issued by the WCC, though owner of the vehicle was served with notice, he remained unrepresented. The second respondent Insurance Company appeared through Counsel and filed written statement denying the entire averments made in the claim petition and occurrence of accident and death of Ramanna on 23.10.2007. The Insurance Company also disputed the relationship of master and servant between the cleaner and owner of the vehicle. Hence, sought for dismissal of the claim petition.
On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the WCC framed necessary issues. The claimant in order to prove his case, examined himself as P.W.I and got marked documents as per Ex.P. 1 to Ex.P. 10. On behalf of respondent-Insurance Company, one of the officers was examined as R.W.I and the insurance policy was marked as Ex.R.2-1.
The WCC on appreciating the oral and documentary evidence let in by the parties, taking into consideration the spot mahazar, panchanama, complaint and charge sheet, held that the accident had occurred due to the negligence on the part of the driver of the tipper bearing No. AP-16-TW-8702. The accident, occurred during the course and out of employment. Claimants are the dependents of the deceased and hence they are entitled for compensation. Though the claimant claim that deceased was getting salary of Rs. 5,000/- per month and Rs. 20/- per day batta, no documents are produced to substantiate the said contention. The WCC had taken the salary of the deceased as Rs. 3,200/- per month. At the time of death, deceased was aged about 22 years and hence applied relevant factor 224.00 and awarded a sum of Rs. 3,58,400/- with 12% I interest p.a. Since the vehicle is covered by the insurance and the deceased was workman within the meaning of section 2(l)(n) of Employees'' Compensation Act, liability was fastened on the insurance company to compensate the claimant. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the WCC, the appellant insurance company filed this appeal.
I have carefully considered the arguments addressed by the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the judgment and order, oral and documentary evidence.
The records clearly disclose that son of the claimant was working as cleaner in the lorry. He died due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending tipper lorry. Immediately after the accident., driver of the lorry lodged a complaint before the jurisdictional Police. Ex.P.2 produced before the WCC clearly discloses that due to the negligence on the part of the driver of the tipper lorry the cleaner of the lorry died. Though the Insurance Company cross-examined the claimant. They have failed to dispel the contention taken by the claimant that the accident had occurred during the course and out of employment. Hence, I am of the view that, the deceased was died while he was on duty. Hence, claimant is entitled for compensation.
With regard to the quantum of compensation is concerned, the WCC took into consideration the minimum wages being paid to the claimant at the relevant point of time, considered the age of the deceased and awarded a sum of Rs. 3,58,400/- with 12% interest p.a. I find that there is no infirmity or irregularity in the finding of the Commissioner.
Though the accident is not occurred within the factory premises, but it had occurred during the course and out of employment. Hence, the deceased will fall under the meaning of section 2(l)(n) of the Employees'' Compensation Act. In view of the same, Insurance Company is liable to compensate the claimant. The appellant has not made out any ground to interfere with the award passed by the WCC. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
The amount in deposit be transmitted to the Court of the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Bagalkot, forthwith for disbursement.