Allahabad High Court
New India Assurance Co Ltd vs Smt. Ramlesh Garg And Others on 16 February, 2023
Bench: Kaushal Jayendra Thaker
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 44
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 1354 of 2005
Appellant :- New India Assurance Co Ltd
Respondent :- Smt. Ramlesh Garg And Others
Counsel for Appellant :- Arvind Kumar
Counsel for Respondent :- Suhas Subhash Mehta,Narendra Singh
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
Heard Sri Arvind Kumar, Advocate assisted by Mr. Anchit Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant. None is present on behalf of respondents.
By way of this appeal, the appellant- New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (in short "Insurance Company") has challenged the judgment and award dated 29.3.2005 passed by Workmen's Compensation Commissioner / Additional Labour Commissioner, Muzaffar Nagar in Case No.WCA -51 of 2002 (Smt. Ramlesh Garg and others Vs. Sri Ashok Kumar and another), awarding compensation of Rs. 3,94,120/- to the widow of the respondents.
The claimants had claimed a sum of Rs.15,00,000/-. The Insurance Company has felt aggrieved and has brought in this challenge. The first ground of challenge is that the deceased being an employment is not proved as no documentary evidence on record, was produced to prove that deceased was a driver on the Maruti Car and therefore, it goes to the root of the matter as unless it is proved that death or injury occurred during the course of employment, no claim is entertained and therefore, the relation of master and servant between the deceased Harish @ Billu with Ashok Kumar, who is potentate as the owner of the vehicle is not sustainable.
The second ground taken is that even if it is believed that he was in employment, the death occurred by way of a murder by unknown assailants. It is alleged that it was the brother of the deceased, who had colluded with the unknown assailants. The third ground is that Maruti Car in question, was the registered as a private vehicle and it was being used as a commercial vehicle and therefore, also the Insurance Company would not be liable to satisfy the amount.
Lastly, it is contended that income of the deceased was not proved as there was no documentary evidence. It is further submitted that income should be considered on the basis of minimum wages. The Commissioner failed in his duty in determining the petition without framing any issues. There was failure of the respondents in complying with the mandatory provisions of Section 10 of Workmen's Compensation Act as no notice was given to the company.
At the outset, it is relevant to discuss the scope of this Court to entertain appeal against the award of Workmen's Compensation Commissioner. The Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.7470 of 2009 North East Karnataka Road Transport Corporation Vs. Smt. Sujatha decided on 2.11.2018 has held as under :
"9. At the outset, we may take note of the fact, being a settled principle, that the question as to whether the employee met with an accident, whether the accident occurred during the course of employment, whether it arose out of an employment, how and in what manner the accident occurred, who was negligent in causing the accident, whether there existed any relationship of employee and employer, what was the age and monthly salary of the employee, how many are the dependents of the deceased employee due to injuries suffered in an accident, whether there was any insurance coverage obtained by the employer to cover the incident etc. are some of the material issues which arise for the just decision of the Commissioner in a claim petition when an employee suffers any bodily injury or dies during the course of his employment and he/his LRS sue/s his employer to claim compensation under the Act.
10. The aforementioned questions are essentially the questions of fact and, therefore, they are required to be proved with the aid of evidence. Once, they are proved either way, the findings recorded thereon are regarded as findings of fact."
The Apex Court further went on to hold as under :
"15. Such appeal is then heard on the question of admission with a view to find out as to whether it involves any substantial question of law or not. Whether the appeal involves a substantial question of law or not depends upon the facts of each case and needs an examination by the High Court. If the substantial question of law arises, the High Court would admit the appeal for final hearing on merit else would dismiss in limini with reasons that it does not involve any substantial question/s of law.
16. Now coming to the facts of this case, we find that the appeal before the High Court did not involve any substantial question of law on the material questions set out above. In other words, in our view, the Commissioner decided all the material questions arising in the case properly on the basis of evidence adduced by the parties and rightly determined the compensation payable to the respondent. It was, therefore, rightly affirmed by the High Court on facts.
17. In this view of the matter, the findings being concurrent findings of fact of the two courts below are binding on this Court. Even otherwise, we find no good ground to call for any interference on any of the factual findings. None of the factual findings are found to be either perverse or arbitrary or based on no evidence or against any provision of law. We accordingly uphold these findings."
As far as present appeal is concerned, the so called substantial questions of law framed are the questions of facts and the findings of the Commissioner on the said issues are not perverse. As far as interest is concerned, the same is answered against the Insurance Company in view of the decision of the Apex Court in North East Karnataka Road Transport Corporation Case (Supra). In Golla Rajanna Etc. Etc. Vs. Divisional Manager and Another, 2017 (1) TAC 259 (SC) also it has been held that under Section 30, the High Court cannot enter into the arena of facts unless they are proved to be perverse.
Unfortunately, this appeal has remained pending for a long time. The answer to this question whether a murder can be said to give rise to a case under Workmen's Compensation Act, is covered by judgment of the Apex Court in Rita Devi Vs. New India Assurance Company Limited, LAWS(SC)2000 4 99.
In view of the above, the appeal fails and is dismissed. The so called questions of law framed by the Insurance Company are answered against it. In fact the substantial questions of law raised are the questions of fact.
Interim relief, if any, shall stand vacated forthwith. The amount deposited with the Commissioner be immediately disbursed to the claimants.
Order Date :- 16.2.2023
P.S.Parihar
