Mamillapalle Srikanth vs T Punnaiah Died 4 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 9406 AP

 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
      CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.953 OF 2017
JUDGMENT:

The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed assailing the

order dated 29.07.2011 passed in W.C.No.9 of 2009 on the file of

the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Deputy

Commissioner of Labour, Ongole.

2. The appellant herein filed W.C.No.9 of 2009 seeking

compensation for the injuries sustained by him. The appellant

herein is the cleaner of the lorry bearing No.AP 27W 0717, the first

opposite party is the original owner of the lorry and the fourth

opposite party is the son of the first opposite party and the second

opposite party is the insurance company. The claim application

was dismissed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation

on the ground that there is no employer and employee relationship

between the appellant herein and the 1st respondent, who is

represented by the 4th respondent, as the 1st respondent was died

prior to the accident. The appellant herein has not examined any

witness in order to substantiate that he is the employee of the first

opposite party, who is no more. The first opposite party was died

on 06.08.2008 and the accident occurred to the lorry on

24.08.2008. The legal heir of the first opposite party has stated

that he do not know the appellant and he has no knowledge about

the affairs of the lorry and the appellant herein failed to prove that

he was under the employment of the first opposite party as on the

date of accident and the death of the deceased was prior to the

accident. As such, I found no reasons to interfere with the order of

the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Deputy

Commissioner of Labour, as the death caused to the deceased was

prior to the accident and there is no such evidence to establish the

relationship between the deceased and the first opposite party as

employee and employer. As there are no merits in the case, this

Court is declined to order notice to the respondents.

3. Accordingly, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is

dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs of the appeal.

As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, in this

appeal shall stand closed.

________________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 07.12.2022 siva

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.953 OF 2017

Date: 07.12.2022

siva