The National Insurancce Company Ltd vs Sri C.Ramudu 4 Ors on 18 October, 2022
In other cases Section 2(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act
provides that whether the injury or injuries incapacitated a
workman for all work which he was capable of performing at the
time of the accident resulting in such disablement. The
Commissioner has got jurisdiction to adjudge and determine. The
Commissioner no doubt has adjudicated it keeping in view the
effect of injuries and opining that the injured was not capable of
performing the driver's job and the injuries have rendered the
injured totally incapacitated from performing the job of driver. No
evidence led by the owner or by the insurance company to prove or
show that the claimant was at the time of accident capable of
performing any other job or was doing any other business. Looking
to the fact that the claimant was incapacitated because of injuries
on the left hip joints resulting in shortening the leg by half an inch
and injury of the left hand wrist incapacitated the respondent-
petitioner from performing the job of driver. It can well be said that
2 1998 SCC online Kar 748
12
the driver was subject to the total disablement for the work which
he was capable of performing at the time of the accident. It cannot
be said that the skilled men, who have been performing the skilled
special trained job of driver on being disabled to do that on
account of injuries caused may opt to do the jobs of sweeper or
cobbler, because what has to be looked into is what was the job at
the time of accident resulting in disablement he was capable of
doing and to do which he was employed. Applying the above test in
my view the present has been a case of total permanent
disablement. I find support from the observations made by this
court in the case of K.P. Hanumantha Gowda v. Devaraju 1996
ACJ 102 (Karnataka). It will be appropriate to quote the following
observation of the said decision: