Himachal Pradesh High Court
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd vs Smt. Nirmala Devi & Others on 12 August, 2015
Author: Sanjay Karol
Bench: Sanjay Karol
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
SHIMLA
FAO No. 265 of 2007
Date of Decision: August 12, 2015
.
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. ...Appellant.
Versus
Smt. Nirmala Devi & others. .....Respondents.
Coram:
of
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the Appellant: Mr. Ashwani K. Sharma, Sr.
Advocate with Ms. Monika Shukla,
rt Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. T.S. Chauhan, Advocate, for
respondents No.1 and 5.
Ms. Vidushi Sharma, Advocate, for
respondents No.2 to 4.
Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr.
Advocate with Ms. Soma Thakur,
Advocate, for respondent No.6.
Sanjay Karol, J (oral)
Appeal stands admitted on following substantial questions of law:-
1. When the employer-employee relationship is not proved on record, owner-insured having denied such relationship in the reply, in the absence of proof of employment of deceased on the insured vehicle, whether the 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:44:49 :::HCHP 2
insurer could be saddled with liability of payment of compensation amount to the claimants?
2. When the death of deceased workman .
has not been proved on record arising out of or during the course of his employment, whether the insurance company can be directed to bear the amount of compensation payable to of claimants?
3. Whether the insurer is not liable to rt deposit the amount on account of interest on the compensation amount in terms of policy of insurance and whether the impugned order awarding interest on compensation amount to the claimants is against the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act?
2. Certain facts are not in dispute. Claimants, being the legal heirs and dependents of deceased Ranjit Singh alias Parkash, filed a petition under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) claiming compensation to the tune of `6,00,000/-. The same stands adjudicated by the Commissioner, under the Workmen's Compensation Act (Sub Divisional Magistrate) Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P., in terms of the impugned award dated ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:44:49 :::HCHP 3 26.06.2006, in Case No.77/02, titled as Nirmala Devi & others Versus Smt. Ropa Sethi & another. A sum of `3,98,800/- alongwith statutory interest stands awarded .
in favour of the claimants.
3. Ropa Sethi (owner) employed Ranjit Singh (deceased) as a driver on vehicle bearing registration No.HR 38F-6867. On 10.04.2005, such vehicle met with of an accident in which the driver died. Factum of death is not disputed. In any event, it stands proved through rt the postmortem report (Ex.PC) and FIR (Ex.PA).
4. No doubt, the owner of the vehicle has disputed the factum of employment of the deceased, but however, such fact stands duly proved through the testimony of Pyar Singh (PW.3), who witnessed the accident. Significantly this witness was also engaged by the very same owner to drive another vehicle. Both the vehicles were carrying goods from Baroda to Delhi and midway, near Udaypur, vehicle driven by Ranjit Singh met with an accident resulting into his death. This witness categorically and unambiguously has deposed that both he and the deceased stood employed by the owner of the vehicle and that at the time of occurrence ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:44:49 :::HCHP 4 of the accident, deceased was driving the vehicle as an employee.
5. Under these circumstances, it cannot be said .
that claimants failed to prove the relationship of the deceased and the owner as that of an employee and employer or that deceased did not die during the course of employment. Substantial questions of law No. 1 and of 2 thus stand answered accordingly.
6. Insofar as substantial question of law No.4 is rt concerned, the issue is no longer res integra and it stands decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Ved Prakash Garg Versus Premi Devi and others, [(1997) 8 SCC 1] as also this Court in National Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Surjit Singh and another, [Latest HLJ 2009 (HP) 1345] and Sudhir Kumar Versus Smt. Anita & others, [2010(2) Him. L.R. 969] wherein it is held that the claimants are entitled to interest of the amount of compensation, so determined under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. Liability to pay the same, solely rests upon the insurer, during the subsistence of the insurance policy there being no violation of any terms thereof.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:44:49 :::HCHP 57. In view of the above, present appeal stands dismissed and disposed of accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
.
(Sanjay Karol),
August 12, 2015 Judge.
(Purohit)
of
rt
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:44:49 :::HCHP