Karnataka High Court
The Oriental Insurance Company Limited vs Smt Kenchamma on 14 August, 2012
Author: N.Ananda
Bench: N.Ananda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANANDA
M.F.A.No.11325/2008 C/W M.F.A.No.11326/2008 (WC)
BETWEEN:
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
Hubli D.O.
Through its Regional Office
No.44/45, Leo Shopping Complex
Residency Road, Bangalore - 560 025
Rep. by its Manager Sri K.Varadarajan. ... Common Appellant
(By Sri B.C.Seetharama Rao, Advocate)
MFA.No.11325/2008
AND:
1. Smt.Kenchamma
W/o Thippeswamy
Aged about 27 Years
R/o Benki Kere
Channagiri Taluk
Davanagere District.
2. Mr.D.Sukrulla, Major
S/o Mr.Abdul Sab
R/o No.61
Lal Kaman, Bellary
(Owner of Lorry No.AP-04/T-4522). ...Respondents
(By Sri S.C.Vijayakumar, Advocate for R1; R2 - Service held
sufficient v.c.o.dt.08.08.2011)
2
This appeal is filed under section 30(1) of Workmen's
Compensation Act, against the award dated 30.06.2008, passed in
KAAADA/KANAPA/CR-179/2006, on the file of the Labour Officer
and Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Davanagere
District, Davanagere, awarding compensation and etc.
MFA.No.11326/2008
AND:
1. Smt.Siddamma
W/o Sri Thippeswamy
Aged about 30 Years
R/o Benki Kere
Channagiri Taluk
Davanagere District.
2. Mr.D.Sukrulla, Major
S/o Mr.Abdul Sab
R/o No.61
Lal Kaman, Bellary
(Owner of Lorry No.AP-04/T-4522). ...Respondents
(By Sri S.C.Vijayakumar, Advocate for R1; R2 - Service held
sufficient v.c.o.dt.08.08.2011)
This appeal is filed under section 30(1) of Workmen's
Compensation Act, against the award dated 30.06.2008,
passed in KAAADA/KANAPA/CR-180/2006, on the file of the
Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen's
Compensation, Davanagere District, Davanagere, awarding
compensation and etc.
***
These appeals coming on for hearing this day, the
Court delivered the following:
3
JUDGMENT
The Insurance Company has filed these appeals, inter alia contending that claimants were not loaders/workers of insured and liability should not have been fastened on Insurance Company.
2. I have heard learned counsel for Insurance Company and learned counsel for claimants and I have been taken through evidence.
3. The evidence of claimants would reveal at the time of accident, they were returning to their village in tipper lorry bearing No.AP-04/T-4522 (insured vehicle) from a mining area. The I-respondent before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation is the owner and insured of tipper lorry bearing No.AP-04/T-4522. The evidence adduced by claimants and statements given by them before police are not consistent.
4
The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, without considering evidence and police records has held that claimants were the employees of insured. The relationship of employer and employees is a jurisdictional aspect. In the absence of clear finding on jurisdictional aspect, the Insurance Company cannot be made liable to pay compensation. The liability of Insurance Company is only to indemnify the owner (insured). It is not clear whether claimants were travelling as loaders and unloaders in tipper lorry bearing No.AP-04/T-4522. As the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation has failed to record proper finding on this jurisdictional aspect, I am of the considered opinion that the matters require reconsideration.
4. Therefore, I pass the following:-
ORDER The appeals are accepted. The impugned awards are set aside. The matters are remanded to the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation at Davangere, for reconsideration in the light of the observations made herein and in 5 accordance with law. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation shall decide the matters on merits, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The amount deposited by Insurance Company in both appeals shall be refunded to it.
Sd/-
JUDGE SNN