Sunday, 03, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Reliance General Insurance Co. ... vs Smt. Sapna Devi & Ors.
2014 Latest Caselaw 2292 Del

Citation : 2014 Latest Caselaw 2292 Del
Judgement Date : 6 May, 2014

Delhi High Court
Reliance General Insurance Co. ... vs Smt. Sapna Devi & Ors. on 6 May, 2014
Author: Valmiki J. Mehta
*           IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                  FAO No.450/2012 and C.M. No.18843/2012 (stay)

%                                                  6th May, 2014

RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.         ..... Appellant
                  Through: Mr. Manish Kaushik, Advocate.

                         Versus

SMT. SAPNA DEVI & ORS.                                  ..... Respondents
                   Through:            Ms. Pratima N. Chauhan, Advocate.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA

To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes


VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)

1.          This first appeal is filed under Section 30 of the Employee's

Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act')

challenging the impugned judgment of the Commissioner dated

13.8.2012 by which the Commissioner allowed the claim petition filed

by the respondent nos.1 to 5 herein.

2.          Whereas     the   case of the     respondents   before the

Commissioner was that the deceased employee Sh. Yogesh Kumar died

as a result of stress/strain of/while driving as a driver of the vehicle

bearing no.HR-55K-3214 (truck) as there was no second driver, the case

FAO 450/2012                                                 Page 1 of 4
 of the appellant-insurance company was that as per the medical records

filed by the respondents themselves, the deceased Sh. Yogesh Kumar

died on account of malaria and thus the death did not happen out of and

in the course of employment.

3.           Learned counsel for the respondents has argued by placing

reliance upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of T.S.

Shylaja Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr.2014 ACJ 480 that

findings of fact can not be interfered with by this Court under Section 30

of the Act. Reliance is also placed on the judgment of the Supreme

Court in the case of Mst. Param Pal Singh through Father Vs.

National Insurance Company and Anr. (2013) 3 SCC 409 that a driver

when he dies on account of stress/strain on driving, death therefrom will

be an accident arising out of and in the course of employment.

4.           In my opinion, this appeal is liable to be allowed because

there exists a complete perversity in findings of facts and which results

in arising of a substantial question of law. Where two views are possible

and Commissioner adopts one view, then it would be a question of

finding of fact which is not interfered by the appellate court under

Section 30 of the Act, but, when only one view is possible as per the

record/evidence and the Commissioner does not take only such possible
FAO 450/2012                                                 Page 2 of 4
 view but takes a view/arrives at a conclusion, totally against the

record/evidence, then there arises a substantial question of law. In the

present case medical records do not show the death on account of

stress/strain of driving, and in fact the medical record Ex.AW1/4 shows

that platelet counts on account of malaria had fallen to as low as 16,000

whereas the normal platelet counts are between 1.5 lacs to 4.5

lacs/cumm and which therefore had resulted in the death. Admittedly,

there is no other medical record filed by the respondent to show the

death of the deceased Sh. Yogesh Kumar allegedly on account of stress

and strain in driving. Once the only record shows death of the deceased

Sh. Yogesh Kumar on account of having suffered from malaria, death

caused on account of malaria, is surely not a death on account of

stress/strain in driving and consequently the findings of the

Commissioner are perverse in holding that the deceased died on account

of an accident arising out of and in the course of employment. In fact, a

reading of the impugned judgment shows that the Commissioner has

skirted the issue of death of the deceased employee on account of

malaria as per the medical record.

5.          In view of the above, appeal is allowed.          Impugned

judgment of the Commissioner dated 13.8.2012 is set aside and the
FAO 450/2012                                                 Page 3 of 4
 claim petition will stand accordingly dismissed. Since the respondents

have received part of the compensation, it will be open to the

appellant/insurance company to recover the same from the respondents

in accordance with law. Parties are left to bear their own costs.




MAY 06, 2014                                  VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.

Ne

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter