THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No. 316 of 2007
JUDGMENT:
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the insurance company against order dated 08.01.2007 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour-1, Hyderabad, in W.C.No.2 of 2005 filed by respondent Nos.1 to 3, who are the wife and parents of the deceased Venkataiah, claiming a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- towards compensation.
There is no dispute that the said Venkataiah was employed as driver of Auto bearing No. AP09 V 9808 belonging to respondent No.4 herein and he died on 06.11.2004 due to heart attack. In the said W.C., after perusing the entire material on record, the Commissioner awarded a sum of Rs.3,07,202/- to respondent Nos.1 to 3 towards compensation with the direction to the appellant and respondent No.4 to deposit the said amount within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order, failing which, interest @12% per annum shall be paid from the date of the accident.
Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the said Venkataiah was already suffering from various ailments and his CKR, J 2 CMA.No.316 of 2007 death is only on account of cumulative effect of the same, though the same is termed as heart attack, as such, no liability can be fastened on the appellant.
Learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 would assert that there is no description in the insurance policy with regard to the death being caused on account of accumulated stress or pre-existing ailments. He would also assert that as the death occurred in the course of employment, the appellant cannot evade the liability undertaken on behalf of the owner of the offending vehicle.
The only question requires to be considered is whether there was any injury/death occurred in the course of employment.
It is to be noted that there is no provision mentioned in the insurance policy that only in certain circumstances, the insurance policy would cover the risk, as rightly asserted by the learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3. In view of the same, the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that no liability can be fastened on the appellant is liable to be rejected, as, the same has no merit. It is not in dispute that the insurance policy does not contain the nature of reasons being advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant as excepted matters. There being no dispute that the death of the said Venkataiah occurred in CKR, J 3 CMA.No.316 of 2007 the course of employment, the appellant cannot evade the liability undertaken on behalf of respondent No.4 under the insurance policy.
In those circumstances, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
_________________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J 23rd JULY, 2021.
kvni