Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. In this Civil Ist Miscellaneous Appeal preferred under Section 30 of Employees Compensation Act/Workmen's Compensation Act, the appellant has assailed the validity of the judgment/Award 30.06.2015 passed by the Commissioner under Employees Compensation Act 1923 (Assistant Labour Commissioner), Jammu.

2. The facts leading to filing of this appeal are that respondent Nos.1 to 3 filed a claim petition before the Commissioner under Employees Compensation Act 1923 (Assistant Labour Commissioner), Jammu for grant of compensation on account of death of Sh. Ashok Kumar, who had allegedly died on 18.06.2010 while driving the Tipper bearing temporary registration No.JMU-9483 near Dalwas National Highway 1-A. Respondent No.4 was also impleaded as party respondent in the claim petition filed by respondent Nos.1 to 3 before ALC Jammu along with the appellant company being the insurer of the said Tipper. It is further stated that the appellant company after its service filed an objections to the claim petition by taking various defences available to it. The company has raised specific defences that the deceased driver was not holding a valid and effective driving licence at the time of accident and further the vehicle was being driven in violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy. In order to prove that the deceased driver Ashok Kumar was holding a fake and forged Driving Licence, the appellant company produced its official Mr.Vikas Rana and Sr. Assistant Mr. Bal Krishan from the office of Licensing Authority, Solan (H.P) as witnesses in the case. These two witnesses produced by the appellant company prove that the driving licence held by the deceased driver Ashok Kumar was a fake and forged document. It is further stated that the Commissioner under Employees Compensation Act 1923 (Assistant Labour Commissioner), Jammu vide his judgment dated 30.06.2015 rejected the defences raised by the appellant company and passed an award of Rs.10,09,936/- in favour of respondent No.1 to 3 and against the appellant company.

d) That though the claim petition was filed by the respondent's No.1 to 3 on the ground that the deceased Ashok Kumar was driving the insured Tipper at the time of accident but neither the copy of the license was produced along with the claim petition nor at the time of leading their evidence. Respondents No.1 to 3 knowingly that the deceased was holding a fake and forged DL, withheld the same from the Hon'ble Court. On the contrary, the company by leading cogent evidence has proved beyond any doubt that the deceased driver Mr. Ashok Kumar was holding a fake and forged driving license, the copy of which was furnished to the appellant company by the owner for settlement of own damage claim. The own damage claim of the insured vehicle was also rejected by the company as the deceased driver was holding a fake driving license. Despite the appellant company having proved that the deceased was holding a fake and forged driving license, the commissioner below fastened the liability of satisfying the award amount on the appellant company. The judgment/award impugned is thus wholly illegal and deserves to be set aside.

viii) Whether the commissioner below could arbitrarily assumed the wages of the deceased driver as Rs.8,000/- per month in the absence of there being any wage certificate issued by the employer or any other cogent/documentary evidence in this regard.?
ix) Whether the commissioner below on the solitary statement of the widow of the deceased could assess the wages of the deceased driver as Rs.8000/- per month without being corroborated by any other independent witness.

14. The points for discussion raised by appellant are, whether Commissioner can allow a claim petition without establishing the relationship of employee and employer between the deceased and the owner of the vehicle; Whether the insurance company can be held liable to satisfy the award when the vehicle was admittedly being driven by a driver holding a fake driving license; Whether the insurance company can be made liable to satisfy the award amount when the vehicle was being driven without Route Permit and Fitness Certificate; Whether the commissioner below could arbitrarily assumed the wages of the deceased driver as Rs.8,000/- per month in the absence of there being any wage certificate issued by the employer or any other cogent/documentary evidence in this regard, are dependants upon appreciation of evidence. These findings can be arrived after appreciating evidence produced by parties during course of trial.