The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd vs P.Lalitha on 19 July, 2010

[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd vs P.Lalitha on 19 July, 2010

_. 1 ..
IN THE HEGH CQEERT GP KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

mzmp THIS THE 19% DAY 09 JULY 20 10 

BEFORE

was I-ION'BLE MR.JI3STIC13.;I1.§E.LAPPV.§; ,VV'*VV  f  

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.93 %.é:>1i"TT2%Q4:§ 

B N:

The Oriental Insurance Co. §j'€,d.,  
Branch Ofﬁcs, V V  
Chikkaxnagalum,

By its Regional Office,  H

Orienmi Insurance  {mg  _  - 
No.44/45, Lea Sho;Qpi:;:_g€3oVmpicX,   
Resiciencjf Read»    VV   V   '
Bangalore 560 025. -f_ 

Repre ssnted,   V V

Deputy  V  ...Appe1L-ant
(By sri.P.B,,12aj:;V& i?§V.S...I2tgV§-3c1ii~V'&1, Adv.)
  V " ...... ..
1.  %si:;%t;}>.La:§:2i;a;AVA;
W] 0;.La*£:=:. ,:=M11ra§i,
Aged 40 :*:€8i'S~

V V'  V " --  V E\!i.'MVan€sha,

. 4' ..f~S/é3;'L3.te.K.M.Mura}i,
V' _ V .-§;'ge«:1*22 yaars.

 V3}. A x ..S:¢V:1£.M.Nisha,

 {}f0.Lat£:.I{.M.Mura_ii,



1«\-I 2 M.
Aged 20 years.

Al} the abova three mspendemis

arf: Rf at,Nisha Niva$a§

Maruihi Nagara,

Rampura PAC).

{§hi}<;.kamag8}uI'u.   

4-. Shri.§{.J.Ma:1junat}1a,

Sf £2. G.S..§unjegoWd.eg
Age Msgiar, Qcc: Ow-'near,
Lorry No.KA---3J3fA 2944,
R/aﬁampura,    -  --   
Ch_i}<kamaga1u1'u. V   ;  V V "  _...f<':$spondc:1ts

(Respondents Served}.  V

This M.F.g!¥' .:m;.0f%%xv*e Act against £135 order dated:VV247G€A?V,vﬁ3Q9:"pgzsééécl.__i;-:3 VEGA] F5 11/200'? 03 the fiie of the Labour " OﬁiQé:"Cémmi$sionar for W0rkmen's Campensaticm, Suki ::)i+=;is:V;:a4::i2?, Chikkamagaluru, awarding a §:a:13pen,:sé::iQ§§ af Rs.AA3',58.,.34O/ - with interest @: 32% PA. T1¢:'_is A§§3 éaJI'j'-coming on for Admission this Day, the

-- Court déiﬁiveresﬁl f()}}()§'%£='§f}§I JU§GMEI'€'}.' appﬁai is directed against the judgmant and orcisz' VT d:;%";f€d":24.9.20G9, passed by the Commissions?' far Worimaaraﬁ _ 3 M caempezxsaigion, Chéiékamagamrls, i.1f"i Case No.WCA/F-1}/2967.

2. 33: ms impugned; j1.1{§§ﬁ€:ﬁ'{. grad 3 :3 /1 Cammissimmr has graiaied co.mpénsa.tj~;€::1 xvii}: ixatermst at 12% pa from} 20. 1Q.'.2.QO2. "'

8. Aggrieved by that, appéiiaiﬁitgfnsggrzénca Company has ﬁled this appeaé, ij;:,:§::§}£ic§:;iiﬁ;g_'i;fi%:.liabﬁiigév

4. In brief '€116 facts A» 'V The decsasad "1'§?7_?:1:ja;1i.V wg£s..VwQr*king 31$ 3; driver in the }.€}I'I"jE bearing ,.~be1onging to the fourth respencient. Thsy <;1'1V2-1.'3,2O.;C~'é'2, {ha deceaseé Mural: was drii.z.ir:g H» A"'b€::-aifing N{}.KA-13/A 2944 fmm C}*1iC}:;1:z:§ga%.;u*.. §G.V}£:%ib3.§§ {En the way, the dﬁzsaased éieveloped behest £0 Shakumaia M€moria1 hO8}")i?;3} T' '}.i€C1 {hare faking treaémarat. The rtzspandents 1 ':0 E'; .- 33:3 wife" grad ahildren 0f the deceased Murali claixgwé <<:o::1'p:j1aéa't:%-2211. The COI1'}.II{1iSSiOI1€}' has awarded a sum of M4_ RS.3,68,34{}/~« with interest at 112% pa {mm 20.10.2002. Aggrievaai by that, the appeEa;1i---insurance Company ha$ ﬁled this appaai, questianﬁig its liabiﬁijgg.

5. The Learned Counsel for the appe}1ant--In$v.2t*$;ﬁ_¢e_ Company contended that the Commissioner was r1Q--:§V._j1i'S'Ei£';a€ii§"V . in g'anti.ng the (30IJI1p€I1S£{'{iO1"i. He aisg ..su_hmi_i1iéd' tlie death has no: OCC11I'3f'€d dug is a0ci&€ni;--..Aa111 <iiA~it iS..:1('s_§.' i1fi:f§i:.€'{"<_:

course of and out of en1p}oyrﬁ.:§i':: 'E31€§'€fGf€';"' ...*.f£1€ Commissienar was not justiﬁad in: gr931}';Lng"$J1e C(5fﬂvi}j€I1»f§'3.ti0II. H6 ?h€i"€f0I'€, _i1";*{ﬁ:,1gn€d judgemsmt and order cannot be'::g1is1;ai13.§é.--iii": 1a§»;;~

6. 'fhg=: re¥S;:-<§'i1c§.s:1?;é;=_ "ta 3 remain E.1{}I'€p§'€S€3§}§L€d, tkleiigiz. J seﬁzéd V. '''E',_ V _I"h:§2'-':.'.;f1' Car§:%ﬁ11}3* consi,<ie1:e& the submissions made the leézﬁéd for the appe}}an€--Insurance Campany". 'A " not ﬁnd any merit in the submission of the Z Ctiéiiﬁsel for the appeiianiz-Insurance Company'. It is _,5W not in dispuie, 3:116 siaceased was drivéiig the 10§'r'y: e;*:};;. i31.9.2QG2 from Cfaickmagahir to Eiubli. The o'f:§";*1:f*}:f'4 admitted that the deceased was drivizzg {he Iorry__i:2. VC5£:):%.i1_"S{fb "

of empieyment. 011 the way, the dsésicaseéd. chest pain and he has been taken -to haspitai and while taking treat1nent;L"'i{ie;.Vdecé€:.:£§:{1"ha§; died. The (Easter has depesezi 3;I1£i';'«.7.{.:;f1{_§A {1e(:;.3,'~;s.§i$a<:i retmess and sufferirxg from severe .retr0s1:€:"vr.1é:s} ' igésreazixig was present and ECG vszés r€u¥¢2«§}c':Vic:1"éC::te Myocardial infraction and txea'{§:{fV§z;'ii:§§x:a$-- gi%.}e:;: ﬁthe deceased did not resp_0I1d to '

9. The been examinad and he has :_he was dxiving the 10133? and near Eiizbii, éffzéi T<ir:':;:1tta:S~E*i{i~~ :ésve1<3p%:d chest pain arid ha was takan ts Haspitai and the dector deciared him I ..i '{%.i ' ';§.::;. {he crossmexammation, {he duster has stateci Z ﬁéceased vzfag suiﬁzring from B? and as per the ,,,,5W records, the deceased was suffering from i}h'1ess since 93.2:-<}ut 8 days am the death may be due ':0 earlier i}1:1<;$f.'-;§.-V~ V. ﬂoater has vaiunteered that the éeaih may be ciuﬂito ' amt'; straw. The fact remains that theC:iééeas€««:i 'ciri§?i§91g {ha vehisia 31:36 he has deveioped chgst has; *¢¢;a%e:;A 'V taken :0 the h{)Spita} and dieé; ';her'é:L. "}'heref%:»re;'*itrcéi?;n0t be said, them is no msxusv '¥3§tWj::fent *€i{i$ "~.{i€atf; the emplwment. it is dear from thki: ._{:v.i'(}€f:1c€~.v{::i_'réré:ord that the deceaséd W88 d£'iviI:t;g45E3f:;;£:'. 'vehiciif: };§€--V}'1as.:d€Ve10pe{i chest pain and he tE1e."}i%i5spifal and died them. Thf31'.'€fOI'€, in "CGﬂSidé'§I"€a"~§%i€%*'; there is 110 merit in the CO{1tE3l'3{t;i{}f1 mat théré was i':o f1exus between. the death and th%5§.Vc§.ri;;:31;)j2'*r1EieitTi£, 311;? acasrdingly, it is rejected. The death has 0ccuI'i"£d ' " £:j(::3.5:se of and 9113; of CI11§3I0§-'1I1€I1't"_ and [' '. f§ié'ref0re; Commissioner has rightly ganted ' "éc¥:ﬁpVé':2sation"ahd it daes :10: cat} fer interference. There is i::5t3f1iS appeal and :19 substantial questiim af iaw aris ;é3~»v§-ix' consideration in this appeal and tlaerefore, the is liable to be dismi$$€x:¥.

E ._-7,...

E1. f%.<:c<>rdi;}g1:§2', the appeal is dismissed. 3:2. The amount in deposit before thiS "

fransnziited to '(I16 Cozmzzisgiezier for di§3'ti{13r;€Iz1'€nt.. V %jQ JU9QE "

BSC/JS

Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court

The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd vs P.Lalitha on 19 July, 2010