Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Kulwant Singh And Others vs Gurcharan Singh @ Channa And Others on 2 February, 2011

Author: K. Kannan

Bench: K. Kannan

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                   CHANDIGARH

                                     FAO No.1429 of 1991 (O&M)
                                     Date of decision:02.02.2011


Kulwant Singh and others                                  ....Appellants


                               versus



Gurcharan Singh @ Channa and others                      ....Respondents


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
                     ----

Present:    Mr. S.C.Chhabra, Advocate, for the appellants.

            Mr. Sanjiv Kumar Arora, Advocate, for respondent No.1.

            Mr. Pradeep Goyal, Advocate, for respondent No.3.
                             ----

1.    Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
      judgment ?
2.    To be referred to the reporters or not ?
3.    Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ?
                                ----

K.Kannan, J. (Oral)

1. The appeal is against the dismissal of the petition for compensation for death of a driver of a truck, aged 30 years. The accident had taken place by a collision with a tractor and the Court found that there was no evidence to prove that the driver of the tractor was responsible for the accident. The case had been filed against the insurer of not merely the tractor but also of the truck which he was driving. Even in the absence of proof of negligence, the liability of the owner for the death of the driver, who was a workman, cannot be doubted. The compensation could have been, therefore, assessed under the Workmen's FAO No.1429 of 1991 (O&M) -2- Compensation Act and the Tribunal could have referred the parties for adjudication under the WC Act in spite of dismissing the same.

2. This Court is a Court of appeal under Section 30 under the WC Act and I will assess the compensation under WC Act to hold that for a person, who was aged 30 years, the relevant factor would have been 207.98. The evidence let in on behalf of the claimant was that he was being paid Rs.800/- per month. The compensation as per Section 3 would, therefore, be Rs.83,192/-. The compensation payable under the Act would attract interest at 12% and the liability shall be on the owner of the truck namely Raj Kumar, arrayed as 4th respondent in the appeal and the insurer namely the Oriental Insurance Company.

3. The appeal is allowed to the above extent.

(K.KANNAN) JUDGE 02.02.2011 sanjeev