Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Akadasi Das and Another

B. Panigrahi, J.—These two appeals arise out of a common order in M. A. No. 91.1 and 912 of 1997 arising out of a W.C. Case No. 403-D/93 filed by the father of deceased Rajkishore Das and W.C. Case No. 54-D/ 93 filed by the father of deceased Umakanta Sethi respectively and this judgment will govern both the cases.

It is claimed by the claimants that the two deceased persons were going in a Truck bearing Registration No. OR-04-4515 as Helper and Coolie respectively on 18.1.1993 from Marsaghai to Chandikhole. On the way the Truck collided against a Mini Truck as a result of which the two deceased persons sustained severe injuries and died subsequently. Since the two deceased persons sustained injuries in an accident in course of their employment and subsequently succumbed to the injuries, the claimants filed claim applications before the Commissioner for Workmen''s Compensation-cum-Deputy Labour Commissioner, Cuttack.

The appellant Insurance Company filed a written statement before the Workmen''s Compensation Commissioner denying the allegations made by the claimants and calling upon the claimants to produce necessary documents in support of their claim. They have also disputed about the deceased that they died in course of their employment and also status of their employment. The owner of the vehicle namely, Respondent No. 2, in this appeal however supported the case of the claimants.

The Commissioner for Workmen''s Compensation after an elaborate discussion of the evidence on record was, however, inclined to grant Rs. 80,176/- as compensation in W. C. Case No. 54-D/93 whereas Rs. 65,541/- in W, C. Case No. 403-D/93.

The Insurance Company filed two appeals before this Court raising a serious contention that the Commissioner had committed gross illegality in assessing the monthly wages of the two deceased persons '' Rs. 750/- and Rs. 900/- respectively. The learned Single Judge of this Court accepted the salary of the deceased persons as held by the Workmen''s Compensation Commissioner and it is abundantly clear that the aforesaid finding was arrived at basing on the analysis of the evidence adduced before the Workmen''s Compensation Commissioner and we need not go into that question regarding status of the deceased persons and that they died in course of their employment once again,

The only point that was canvassed before the first appellate court was that the driver of the offending vehicle had no requisite driving licence for which the conditions of the Insurance Policy having been violated by the insured, therefore, the Insurance Company has no obligation to pay the compensation amount. The learned Single Judge had however taken into consideration of such plea and confirmed the award passed by the Commissioner for Workmen''s Compensation.

Mr. Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has invited our attention to a recent judgment of the Supreme Court reported in New India Assurance Co., Shimla Vs. Kamla and Others etc. etc., and submitted that in view of the settled position of law as decided in the aforesaid judgment, there was no option left with the Court than to send it back to the Court of the Commissioner of Workmen''s Compensation to adjudicate the liability between the insured and the insurer.

While appreciating the aforesaid contention, we, however, felt it necessary to quote the authoritative decision of the Supreme Court, wherein it has been held that

*** *** *** As a point of law we have no manner of doubt that a fake licence cannot get its forgery outfit stripped off merely on account of some officer renewing the same with or without knowing it to be forged. Section 15 of the Act only empowers any licensing authority to renew a driving licence issued under the provisions of this Act with effect from the date of its expiry. No licensing authority has the power to renew a fake licence and therefore, a renew if at all made cannot transform a fake licence as genuine. Any counterfeit document showing that it contains a purported order of a statutory authority would ever remain counterfeit about the fact that other persons including some statutory authorities would have acted on the document knowingly on the assumption that it is genuine.

The observation of the Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Such a Singh (1994) (1) ACC CJ 374 (supra) that renewal of a document which purports to be a driving licence, will robe even a forged document with validity on account of Section 15 of the Act, propound a very dangerous proposition. If that proposition is allowed to stand as a legal principle, it may, no doubt, thrill counterfeiters the words over as they would be encouraged to manufacture fake documents in a legion. What was originally a forgery would remain null and void for ever and it would not acquire legal validity at any time by whatever process of sanctification subsequently done on it. Forgery is antithesis to legality and law cannot afford to validate a forgery.

*** *** *** A reading of the proviso to Sub-section (4) as well as the language employed in Sub-section (5) would indicate that they are intended to safeguard the interest of an insurer who otherwise has no liability to pay any amount to the insured but for the provisions contained in Chapter XI of the Act. This means, the insurer has to pay to the third parties only on account of the fact that a policy of insurance has been issued in respect of the vehicle, but the insurer is entitled to recover any such sum from the insured if the insurer were not otherwise liable to pay such sum to the insured by virtue of the conditions of the contract of insurance indicated by the policy.

*** *** ***

In the above circumstances, we do not find any other option but to remit the case back to the Commissioner for Workmen''s Compensation to adjudicate upon the issue whether any of the conditions in the Policy has been violated by the insured. In case it is found that there has been violation of the conditions stipulated in the Policy by the insured, even if the compensation has been paid by the insurer, then the same shall be reimbursed by the Insured to the Insurer, namely, the Insurance Company. It is needless to mention that while deciding such issue, the presence of the claimants is not necessary, since this is a matter between the Insured and the Insurer. Under the Policy the Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation to the third party. But such amount can be reimbursed to the insurer, if there has been any violation of the conditions in the Policy.

Thus, the aforesaid circumstances, we are told that the amount deposited in W. C. Case No. 403-D/93 by the Insurance Company has been withdrawn by the claimants. Therefore, in such situation, no order is necessary to be passed with regard to the disbursal of the amount. But in W. C. Case No. 54-D/93 (M.A. No. 912/79 in Babaji Sethi''s case, an amount of Rs. 80,176/- has been deposited in this Court which is lying with the Registry. The amount has been utilized in a short-term deposit. Out of the said amount, Rs. 60,000/- and interest accrued thereon be deposited in the name of respondent No. 1 and his wife for a period of 5 years in any Nationalised Bank on monthly Income Scheme and the balance amount, i.e. Rs. 20,176/- and interest accrued thereon be paid to the claimants within three weeks.

The A.H.Os. are disposed of in the light of the above observation, but in the circumstances without costs.

While deciding the issue with regard to the liability of the insured and the insurer, it will be open to both parties to file fresh documents and adduce oral evidence, if they so desire. The documents which have been filed by the appellant be returned to the learned counsel for presentation before the Commissioner for Workmen''s Compensation.

P.K. Misra, J.

I agree.