Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 384 (RAJ)

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Vidhya Devi

2011-02-21

MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA

body2011
JUDGMENT 1. - This Misc. Appeal has been filed by the appellant non-claimant against the judgment/award dated 13-12-2001 passed by Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Jaipur City, Jaipur (for short the learned Commissioner ) in case No. WCC/F/24/1994 whereby an award for Rs. 86,112/- has been passed in favour of claimants respondents No. 1 to 4. 2. Brief facts of the case are that claimants respondents No. 1 to 4 filed an application under the provisions of Workmen s Compensation Act, 1923 before the Workmen Compensation Commissioner on 8-6-1990 claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,00,000/- and interest thereon on account of alleged loss suffered by them due to death of Mr. Rohitash Kumar in the accident allegedly occurred in the intervening night of 29/30-12-1989. The claimants came with the case that at the time of accident the deceased Rohitash Kumar was working as driver of Truck No. GRN-5027 belonging to one Patel Usmanganj Gulam Navi and insured with appellant insurance company. The said claim petition was later-on transferred to the Court of Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Jaipur City, Jaipur. The said claim petition was registered as Case No. WCC/F/24/1994. 3. Reply to the claim petition was filed. Statements of the witnesses were recorded. On the basis of the pleadings of parties, the learned Commissioner framed the issues. 4. The learned Commissioner after considering the evidence produced by the parties, passed the impugned award. Hence, this Misc.Appeal before this Court. 5. Learned counsel for the non-claimant appellant submits that the learned Commissioner while passing the impugned award has not considered the statements of the witnesses. The Commissioner has ignored the settled proposition of law that unless the parties are served the Commissioner has got no jurisdiction to decide the claim petition. In the instant case the claimants have not got served the notices on correct address of the owner as per the directions issued by the learned Commissioner. The learned Commissioner has ignored the facts altogether that there is no documentary evidence on record to show that the accident occurred during the course of employment. The findings of learned Commissioner holding that the accident occurred during the course of employment of the deceased is contrary to the law. The vehicle was being driven by the driver without having valid driving license, which amounts the breach of policy conditions. Hence the impugned award passed by the learned Commissioner be quashed and set aside. The findings of learned Commissioner holding that the accident occurred during the course of employment of the deceased is contrary to the law. The vehicle was being driven by the driver without having valid driving license, which amounts the breach of policy conditions. Hence the impugned award passed by the learned Commissioner be quashed and set aside. 6. On the other hand Mr. B. C. Rawat, learned counsel appearing for the claimants respondents submits that the service of notice upon the owner has been made by registered A.D. He submits that when he did not turn up, ex parte proceedings were initiated. It is an admitted fact that deceased had died during the course of employment. Ex. 7 is the driving licence of the driver who was driving the vehicle at the time of accident. He submits that the alleged incident has taken place in the year 1989 i.e. near about 22 years ago which tantamounts to mental agony. He submits that the claimants respondents have received the amount as awarded by the learned Commissioner. Thus, the impugned award passed by learned Commissioner need no interference of this Court. 7. From a bare perusal of the facts of the case and the material made available to me as also going through the record of the case, in my considered view, the learned Commissioner while passing the impugned award has considered each and every aspect of the matter and the impugned award passed by the learned Commissioner need no interference of this Court. 8. In the result, this Misc. Appeal is devoid of merits and stands dismissed and the award dated 13-12-2001 passed by Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Jaipur City, Jaipur in case No. WCC/F/24/1994 is hereby confirmed.Appeal dismissed. *******