Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
The New India Assurance Co Ltd vs Miriyala Siva Kumari on 2 September, 2025
APHC010020692024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3506]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 16/2024
Between:
1. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD, REP. BY ITS DIVISIONAL
MANAGER, LVR AND SONS CLUB AND READING ROOM
COMPLEX, 0PP. TO HARIHARAMAHAL, KORITEPAUD, GUNTUR
CITY, GUNTUR DISTRICT POLICY NO. 62090031120100002541
VALID FROM 23-2-2013 TO 22-2-2014
...APPELLANT
AND
1. MIRIYALA SIVA KUMARI, W/O. DURGA RAO AGED ABOUT 47
YEARS, KOPPURAVURU VILLAGE, PEDAKAKANI MANDAL,
GUNTUR DISTRICT
2. MIRIYALA SIVA SANKARA RAO, S/O. DURGA RAO, AGED ABOUT 30
YEARS, KOPPURAVURU VILLAGE, PEDAKAKANI MANDAL,
GUNTUR DISTRICT
3. MIRIYALA RAMESH, S/O. DURGA RAO, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
KOPPURAVURU VILLAGE, PEDAKAKANI MANDAL, GUNTUR
DISTRICT
4. VINNAKOTA SIVAIAH, S/O. NAGENDRAM, (OWNER OF THE LORRY
AP 07 TB 1295) H.NO. 3-134, KOPPURAVURU VILLAGE,
PEDAKAKANI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Appeal Under Section_____against ordersbegs to present this
Memorandum of Civil Miscellaneous Appeal against the Judgment dated 28-
03-2023 passed in E.C. Case No 03/2020, on the file of COMMISSIONER
FOR EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION and ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
OF LABOUR, GUNTUR
IA NO: 1 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased
Pleased to condone the delay of (228 ) days in filing the above C.M.A. filed
against E.C. Case No: 03/2020, dated 28-03- 2023 on the file of
COMMISSIONER FOR EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION & ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR, GUNTUR and pass
IA NO: 2 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased
Pleased to suspend the the order and decree made in E.C. Case No: 03/2020
Dated: 28-03-2023on the file of COMMISSIONER FOR EMPLOYEES
COMPENSATION & ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR,
GUNTURand pass
Counsel for the Appellant:
1. AMANCHARLA SATISH BABU
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. UMA MAHESWAR KATAKAMSETTY
The Court made the following:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO:16/2024
JUDGMENT:
Present appeal is preferred by Insurer assailing order dated 28.03.2023 passed in E.C. Case No.03/2020 on the file of Court of Commissioner for Employees Compensation & Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Guntur (hereinafter, for short 'Court of Commissioner'), by which it was ordered to pay compensation of ₹5,57,874/- on account of death.
2. Parties herein are referred to as they were arrayed before the Court of Commissioner.
3. Brief facts of the case in a nutshell are as follows:-
(a) Wife of deceased along with two children preferred claim before Court of Commissioner claiming compensation under Section 22(1) of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. The deceased stated to be heavy vehicle driver engaged by opposite party - 1. The lorry owned by opposite party - 2. The vehicle was hired for transport of goods to Vizag and from there to Koyyalagudem and from there to Khammam for picking up another 2 CGR, J CMA No.16 of 2024 load of goods. In process, deceased had travelled considerable miles, while vehicle was returning from Koyyalagudem -
Khammam, en route he suffered with heart attack and succumbed when vehicle was near Aswaraopet. The incident occurred on 12.11.2013 at about 05.00 p.m. Incident was reported to police, who registered Crime No.209/2013, after conducting inquest and postmortem, body was handed over to the claimants. The deceased stated to be aged 49 years and earning about ₹7,000/- per month towards salaries besides commission of ₹4,000/- per month, accordingly claim was laid for an amount of ₹6,00,000/- under the provisions of Workmen's Compensation Act.
(b) The employer was arrayed as opposite party - 1 and insurer of lorry as opposite party - 2. The employer filed written statement admitting the relationship between the deceased and him, besides stating that the lorry was duly insured with opposite party - 2 and as the incident occurred during the course of employment, in view of subsistence of valid driving license and insurance, it was pleaded that the liability, if any, would be on opposite party - 2 only. Opposite party - 2 also filed counter denying the occurrence of incident, the relationship between deceased and opposite party - 1. Further it was also denied that deceased died due to 3 CGR, J CMA No.16 of 2024 heart attack and that said eventuality was not covered under the policy. In sum and substance, stand was taken that there was no nexus between the death and alleged accident, even the amount of compensation was also disputed to be on higher side.
(c) In order to prove the case of claimants, wife of deceased was examined as A.W.1, elder son as A.W.2 and cleaner of the lorry as A.W.3, besides marking Exs.A1 to A4. On behalf of the Insurer, their officer was examined as R.W.1 and got marked Ex.B1 policy.
(d) Based on the pleadings, Court of Commissioner framed following issues:
1) Whether the deceased was a workman as per the provisions of the Act and he died due to personal injuries he received in an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment? or not, under Opposite Party - 1.
2) Amount of compensation payable? to the applicants.
3) Who are liable to pay the compensation?
(e) On appreciation of the evidence, both oral and documentary, the Commissioner had come to conclusion that the deceased while on duty, suffered with heart attack due to stress and strain.
Therefore, the cause of death had direct nexus with his employment and further that the deceased was duly employed with 4 CGR, J CMA No.16 of 2024 opposite party - 1 meaning thereby, the relationship of employer- employee was also held in favour of claimants. In view of these two aspects being decided affirmatively, considering the age of deceased as 49 years and computing minimum wages as payable to heavy vehicle driver, assessed the income as ₹7,091/- and accordingly, a compensation of ₹5,55,874/- came to be awarded.
(f) Assailing the same, present appeal is filed by Insurer.
4. Heard Smt.Kesari Kumari Nemla, learned counsel, representing on behalf of Sri Amancharla Satish Babu, learned counsel for appellant and Ms.SLN Harika, learned counsel, representing on behalf of Sri Uma Maheswar Katakamsetty, learned counsel for respondents.
5. Learned counsel for appellant raised following substantial question of law for consideration of this court:
Whether, in the facts and circumstances, the findings recorded by Court of Commissioner with regard to the death of deceased to be on account of heart attack due to stress and strain in course of employment entitling to claim compensation under the provisions of Workmen's Compensation Act suffered from perversity? 5
CGR, J CMA No.16 of 2024
6. Learned counsel for appellant contended that there is no clear-cut evidence to show that deceased died due to heart attack and that the same was on account of stress and strain in the course of his employment and mere postmortem report suggesting the cause of death to be on account of heart attack would not be conclusive and the claimants have to discharge their burden of proof of establishing the factum of death on account of heart attack. It is her submission that the factum of suffering heart attack should have co-relation with the cause for stress and strain which can only be established through medical opinion by examining the doctor, as the same is lacking in the present case, the findings recorded by Commissioner to the effect that deceased suffered heart attack during course of employment suffers from manifest illegality and therefore perverse. In support of her submissions, reliance has been placed on the following judgments.
(i) Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Shakuntala Chandrakant Shreshti v. Prabhakar Maruti Garvali & another1 1 (2007) 11 SCC 668 6 CGR, J CMA No.16 of 2024
(ii) Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Jyothi Ademma v. Plant Engineer, Nellore & another2
(iii) Judgment of the High Court of Madras in Life Insurance Corporation v. Minor Rohini3
(iv) Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Alka Shukla v. Life Insurance Corporation of India4
7. Opposing the contentions above, learned counsel for respondents/claimants supported the impugned order by contending that the Court of Commissioner has clearly analyzed the evidence on record, both oral and documentary, for coming to conclusion that the deceased died due to heart attack, which was a result of stress and strain in the course of employment. Even the evidence on record indicated that the deceased never had any prior or past history of heart ailment and heart stroke was first of its nature and further the factum of death on account of heart attack is clearly evident from the postmortem report, which is crucial piece of evidence, therefore, the findings recorded by Tribunal cannot be said to be perverse in any manner. She further contended that 2 (2006) 5 SCC 513 3 2012 SCC OnLine Mad 1050 4 (2019) 6 SCC 64 7 CGR, J CMA No.16 of 2024 Court of Commissioner is last fact finding authority, such findings of fact cannot be disturbed and no substantial question of law would arise to reappreciate the evidence on record. In support of her submissions, reliance has been placed on the following judgments:
(i) Judgment of this Court in Chadalavada Srilakshmi and others v. B.Nageswara Rao and another5
(ii) Judgment of this Court in Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company Ltd., v. Vaniipenta Manikyamma and others6
(iii) Judgment of this Court in National Insurance Company Ltd., v. Sambireddy Venkataramana and five others7
(iv) Judgment of this Court in Oriental Insurance Company Limited v. Chukkala Eshwari and others8 5 2024 SCC OnLine AP 1939 6 2025 SCC OnLine AP 1051 7 CMA No.864 of 2008, judgment dated 19.07.2022 8 2024 SCC OnLine AP 897 8 CGR, J CMA No.16 of 2024
(v) Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in C.Manjamma and another v. Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Company Limited9
8. Learned counsel for appellant mainly relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Shakuntala's case1 and drawn attention of this Court in particular to following paras:
"22. There are a large number of English and American decisions, some of which have been taken note of in ESI Corpn. [(1996) 6 SCC 1 : 1996 SCC (L&S) 1361] in regard to essential ingredients for such finding and the tests attracting the provisions of Section 3 of the Act. The principles are:
(1) There must be a causal connection between the injury and the accident and the accident and the work done in the course of employment.
(2) The onus is upon the applicant to show that it was the work and the resulting strain which contributed to or aggravated the injury.
(3) If the evidence brought on records establishes a greater probability which satisfies a reasonable man that the work contributed to the causing of the personal injury, it would be enough for the workman to succeed, but the same would depend upon the fact of each case.9
(2022) 6 SCC 206 9 CGR, J CMA No.16 of 2024
23. Injury suffered should be a physiological injury. Accident, ordinarily, would have to be understood as unforeseen or uncomprehended or could not be foreseen or comprehended. A finding of fact, thus, has to be arrived at, inter alia, having regard to the nature of the work and the situation in which the deceased was placed.
24. There is a crucial link between the causal connections of employment with death. Such a link with evidence cannot be a matter of surmise or conjecture. If a finding is arrived at without pleading or legal evidence the statutory authority will commit a jurisdictional error while exercising jurisdiction.
25. An accident may lead to death but that an accident had taken place must be proved. Only because a death has taken place in course of employment will not amount to accident. In other words, death must arise out of accident.
There is no presumption that an accident had occurred.
26. In a case of this nature to prove that accident has taken place, factors which would have to be established, inter alia, are:
(1) stress and strain arising during the course of employment, (2) nature of employment, (3) injury aggravated due to stress and strain. 10
CGR, J CMA No.16 of 2024
27. The deceased was travelling in a vehicle. The same by itself cannot give rise to an inference that the job was strenuous.
28. Only because a person dies of heart attack, the same does not give rise to automatic presumption that the same was by way of accident. A person may be suffering from a heart disease although he may not be aware of the same. Medical opinion will be of relevance providing guidance to court in this behalf.
29. Circumstances must exist to establish that death was caused by reason of failure of heart was because of stress and strain of work. Stress and strain resulting in a sudden heart failure in a case of the present nature would not be presumed. No legal fiction therefor can be raised. As a person suffering from a heart disease may not be aware thereof, medical opinion therefore would be of relevance. Each case, therefore, has to be considered on its own fact and no hard-and-fast rule can be laid down therefor."
9. By referring to aforesaid principles and also observations made, it has been contended that mere death on account of heart attack does not raise an automatic presumption that the same was on account of accident, unless the same is supported by proper medical opinion. In the facts and circumstances of the case, since no such medical opinion has been brought on record by the 11 CGR, J CMA No.16 of 2024 claimants, it cannot be said that the heart attack has resulted only on account of stress and strain while driving the lorry.
10. A close glance of aforesaid observations of Hon'ble Apex Court indicates the relevancy of medical opinion to suggest that a person suffered from heart disease, and it has also been stated that each case has to be decided on its own facts and that no hard and fast rule can be laid down for that purpose. Even otherwise, medical opinion referred to above would necessarily not be only that of the doctor upon examination, it can even be in any other form of evidence as well. One cannot dispute or deny that even postmortem report, which normally would be conducted by medical officer of Government Hospital, can be considered as one such piece of evidence. Either a doctor or any piece of medical opinion would only suggest or throw light on the cause of death, but cannot pierce and go deep into to make a further assessment of the reasons for cause of heart attack. It is the pleaded case of claimants that the deceased suffered heart attack due to nature of work he was undertaking. The postmortem report, which is marked as one of the exhibits and also evidence of R.W.3, cleaner of bus spoke of the cause of death. In considered opinion of this Court, even postmortem report can be valid piece of evidence to come to 12 CGR, J CMA No.16 of 2024 conclusion for the cause of death. The deceased driver was hale and healthy. The test to be applied is to see whether the work and the resulting stress and strain have any co-relation or nexus in cause of accident or injury.
11. Learned counsel for respondent while addressing aforesaid aspect has drawn attention of this Court to the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in C.Manjamma's case9 and that of coordinate bench judgments of this Court in Chadalavada Srilakshmi and others5, Vaniipenta Manikyamma and others6 and Chukkala Eshwari and others8, which also were essentially considering the inquest report and postmortem reports for coming to conclusion the cause of death to be on account of heart attack and in none of those cases any doctor in specific came to be examined to prove aforesaid aspect. Normally, only if person suffers from heart attack and he is rushed to hospital for treatment, the doctors who treated him may be in a position to give evidence speaking about the cause of heart attack and also the real health condition of such person. But in cases where a person dies on account of heart attack even before he has been taken to hospital for treatment, the only way of finding out the cause of death would be by conducting postmortem, even such postmortem would be conducted by qualified doctor. 13
CGR, J CMA No.16 of 2024 Therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court, postmortem report can safely be taken into consideration for the purpose of ascertaining the cause of death.
12. Learned counsel for appellant has drawn attention of this Court to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Jyoti Ademma's case2, wherein it is observed as follows:
"8. In the present case, it has been brought on record that the deceased was suffering from chest disease and was previously being treated for such disease. The High Court also noted that the job of the deceased was only to switch on or off and, therefore, the doctor had clearly opined that there was no scope for any stress or strain in his duties. In view of the factual findings recorded, the High Court's judgment does not suffer from any infirmity."
13. Based on evidence on record, finding of fact was arrived at in that particular case that nature of the job was that of switching on and off at Thermal Power Station, coupled with doctor's evidence, it was opined that it does not give scope for any stress or strain in performing duties. Whereas in the present case, the facts are completely different from those. Here, the deceased was working as heavy vehicle driver. Therefore, the said judgment 14 CGR, J CMA No.16 of 2024 does not really have any application to the facts of the present case.
14. Learned counsel for appellant has referred to judgment of Madras High Court in Minor Rohini's case3 and judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Alka Shukla's case4, to contend that dying on account of heart attack cannot be attributable to any accident as such, therefore, question of granting compensation would not arise. These two judgments essentially were being dealt with in relation to an insurance coverage under life insurance but not under any special enactment. The parameters for consideration of granting compensation under Workmen's Compensation Act, which is beneficial piece of legislation, completely stand on different footing.
15. Cases of deceased truck drivers, who died on account of heart attack during the course of their job, fell for consideration before this Court and as well as Hon'ble Apex Court. In one such case, in Param Pal Singh v. National Insurance Company Limited10, the Hon'ble Apex Court, considering relatively similar 10 (2013) 3 SCC 409 15 CGR, J CMA No.16 of 2024 facts while dealing with the provisions of Employees Compensation Act, held as under:
"29. Applying the various principles laid down in the above decisions to the facts of this case, we can validly conclude that there was causal connection to the death of the deceased with that of his employment as a truck driver. We cannot lose sight of the fact that a 45-year-old driver meets with his unexpected death, may be due to heart failure while driving the vehicle from Delhi to a distant place called Nimiaghat near Jharkhand which is about 1152 km away from Delhi, would have definitely undergone grave strain and stress due to such long distance driving. The deceased being a professional heavy vehicle driver when undertakes the job of such driving as his regular avocation it can be safely held that such constant driving of heavy vehicle, being dependent solely upon his physical and mental resources and endurance, there was every reason to assume that the vocation of driving was a material contributory factor if not the sole cause that accelerated his unexpected death to occur which in all fairness should be held to be an untoward mishap in his lifespan. Such an "untoward mishap" can therefore be reasonably described as an "accident" as having been caused solely attributable to the nature of employment indulged in with his employer which was in the course of such employer's trade or business." 16
CGR, J CMA No.16 of 2024
16. Following aforesaid judgment, Coordinate Benches of this Court also expressed similar view in Chadalavada Srilakshmi's case5, Vaniipenta Manikyamma's case6 and Chukkala Eshwari's case8.
17. Keeping in view aforesaid judgments of this Court as well as Hon'ble Apex Court, it has to be seen whether the foundational facts pleaded were sufficiently proved and the findings of Court of Commissioner really suffer from any perversity. In order to prove the case of claimants, to show that if he had died on account of heart attack, medical evidence by way of postmortem report was produced as Ex.A2. Further eye witness, who has witnessed the incident, cleaner of lorry has been examined as A.W.3. Considering these two crucial evidences, the Tribunal has clearly rendered finding that the cause of death was due to heart attack and the same in turn was due to stress and strain in his work. As there is a clear finding on aforesaid aspect backed by cogent evidence, this Court cannot come to any other conclusion rather than affirming said findings of fact. Learned counsel for respondent submitted that present appeal really does not raise any substantial question of law, inasmuch as the findings recorded by the Tribunal do not suffer from any perversity. Mere reconsideration or 17 CGR, J CMA No.16 of 2024 re-examination of evidence on record would not raise any substantial question of law. As this Court has come to conclusion that the findings recorded by Court of Commissioner really do not suffer from manifest illegality or tainted to be perverse and keeping in view the judgments referred to above, facts of present case really would not raise any substantial question of law as such.
18. Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal fails and stands dismissed. Keeping in view of dismissal of present appeal, the respondents/claimants are at liberty to withdraw the balance amount. No costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending consideration, if any, in this case shall stand closed.
_______________________ CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J 02.09.2025 SS