JUDGMENT : (Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred under Section 30 of the Workmen Compensation Act, against the Award dated 22.05.2017 made in W.C.No.36 of 2016 on the file of the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Coonoor.) 1. The Award dated 22.05.2017 passed in W.C.No.36 of 2016 by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Coonoor, is under challenge in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. 2. The question of law mainly raised is the liability fixed by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour on the appellant-Insurance Company is in accordance with law or not. 3. The accident occurred while the claimant collected the documents from the Police Station and crossing the road. While crossing the road, the Motorcycle bearing Registration No.MP 06 ME 6495 rashly driven, dashed against the first respondent and caused the accident. Thus, it is contended that the insured lorry is no way connected with the accident and the said factum is admitted by the claimant in the application itself. 4. The Insurance Company filed counter, disputing the liability mainly on the ground that the vehicle insured with the appellant-Insurance Company had not met with an accident at all. Therefore, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay compensation to the claimant. 5. The facts narrated even in the application reveal that the claimant had gone to the Police Station to collect the RC and Permit and further, he had not driven the vehicle during the relevant point of time and therefore, the liability cannot be fixed on the appellant-Insurance Company. 6. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour adjudicated the issues with reference to the documents and the evidences produced by the respective parties. 7. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour has arrived a conclusion that there was Insurance Policy, which was in force and the lorry was insured with the appellant-Insurance Company and the claimant was a driver of that lorry. Therefore, compensation is to be paid by the appellant-Insurance Company. 8. This Court is of the considered opinion that employer-employee relationship was established. As rightly decided by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, admittedly, the claimant was working as driver with one Mr.Mani, who is the second respondent herein. 9. The factum regarding the accident was also established. Therefore, compensation is to be paid by the appellant-Insurance Company. 8. This Court is of the considered opinion that employer-employee relationship was established. As rightly decided by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, admittedly, the claimant was working as driver with one Mr.Mani, who is the second respondent herein. 9. The factum regarding the accident was also established. However, the fact remains that the claimant had gone to the Police Station to collect the RC and Permit and while crossing the road, two wheeler dashed against him and he sustained injuries and the same was not established during the relevant point of time. 10. The claimant had driven the insured lorry and parked the same at least before the Police Station. It was not established that after parking the lorry, he crossed the road for collecting the RC and Permit from the Police Station. In the absence of any of these factors, the liability cannot be fixed on the Insurance Company, as there is no proof to show that the vehicle, which was insured, met with an accident. Thus, the question of law raised in this regard deserves to be considered. 11. The liability cannot be shifted on the Insurance Company in the absence of any evidence to establish that the insured vehicle met with an accident and at the time of accident, the victim was driving the insured vehicle. None of these factors are established and therefore, the Deputy Commissioner of Labour committed an error in fixing the liability on the appellant-Insurance Company. However, the liability is to be fixed on the owner of the vehicle, as the claimant was the employee and the employer-employee relationship was established. 12. In this view of the matter, the Award dated 22.05.2017 passed in W.C. No.36 of 2016 by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Coonoor, stands set aside as far as the appellant is concerned and the Award stands confirmed in respect of the owner of the vehicle is concerned. The owner of the vehicle is liable to pay the Award amount along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. 13. Accordingly, Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.197 of 2020 stands allowed in respect of appellant-Insurance Company is concerned. The appellant-National Insurance Company is permitted to withdraw the deposited amount with accrued interest by filing an appropriate application before the Competent Authority and payments are to be made through RTGS. 13. Accordingly, Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.197 of 2020 stands allowed in respect of appellant-Insurance Company is concerned. The appellant-National Insurance Company is permitted to withdraw the deposited amount with accrued interest by filing an appropriate application before the Competent Authority and payments are to be made through RTGS. However, there shall be no order as to costs. The connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.