The Present Civil Miscellaneous ... vs Unknown
2022 Latest Caselaw 4410 AP

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

                     C.M.A. No.1046 OF 2009
JUDGMENT:

The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the

Insurance Company against Order dated 13.05.2005 in W.C. No.80

of 2004 on the ground that the applicant is not cleaner in the lorry

bearing No.AP 37 V 2509 and there is no employee and employer

relationship in between the claimant and the opposite party No.1.

Hence, the insurance company need not to indemnify for the injury

sustained by the claimant. This is the contention of the insurance

company before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation

and Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Eluru, (hereinafter referred

to as Commissioner). Despite the said objections, the

Commissioner has awarded an amount of Rs.3,12,527/- (Rupees

Three Lakhs Twelve Thousand Five Hundred and Twenty Seven

only) towards compensation for the injury sustained by the

claimant who is respondent No.1 herein, which lead to file the

present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

2. The learned counsel for the appellant Sri Naresh Byrapaneni

would submit that as per the evidence of the applicant, he along

with two others entered into lorry at Nidadavolu Railway Station as

per the record, without considering the admission of claimant,

erroneously compensation was awarded, and the other submission

that the Doctor-AW-2 has stated that without perusing any case

sheet he has issued the disability certificate and the learned

counsel further submitted that opposite party No.1 in his

argument has admitted that the claimant/injured was boarded

into lorry as a passenger.

3. There is no response from the respondents side, though the

matter under went several adjournments for their submissions. It

is a trait law that the admitted fact need not to be proved. In this

matter, AW-1 admitted that he was boarded as passenger along

with two others at Nidadavolu railway station where the lorry

started at Rajahmundry on 13.04.2004.

4. Despite the admission made by the claimant, the

Commissioner has erroneously awarded compensation contrary to

the appellant. Hence, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is

allowed and the Order dated 13.05.2005 passed in W.C. No.80 of

2004 is hereby set aside and if any amount paid to the claimant

that shall not be recovered by the insurance company.

5. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed. No

costs.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, stands

dismissed.

_______________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

Date: 22-07-2022 Harin

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

C.M.A. No. 1046 of 2009 Date: 22-07-2022

Harin