Delhi High Court
The National Insurance Company ... vs Smt. Pooja Devi & Ors. on 30 May, 2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ FAO No.262/2017
% 30th May, 2017
THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
..... Appellant
Through: Mr. S.P.Jain and Mr. Himanshu
Gambhir, Advocates.
versus
SMT. POOJA DEVI & ORS. ..... Respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA
To be referred to the Reporter or not?
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)
1. This first appeal under Section 30 of the Employee's
Compensation Act is filed by the Insurance Company, the respondent
no.2 before the Employee's Compensation Commissioner below,
impugning the judgment of the Employee's Compensation
Commissioner dated 30.1.2017 whereby the claim petition filed by the
respondent nos. 1 and 2 herein was allowed and compensation granted
on account of death of Sh. Pradeep who was the husband and father of
the claimants/respondent nos.1 and 2. The Employee's Compensation
Commissioner has awarded compensation as per the statutory formula
totaling to Rs.8,36,920/- along with interest at 12% per annum simple.
2. The present appellant was the respondent no.2 in the
proceedings before the Employee's Compensation Commissioner.
Admittedly, the present appellant did not appear in the proceedings
before the Employee's Compensation Commissioner in spite of
service. Hence there is no pleading filed on behalf of the appellant
before the Employee's Compensation Commissioner and nor is any
evidence led on behalf of the appellant before the Employee's
Compensation Commissioner below.
3. The facts of the case are that the deceased Pradeep was
employed by the respondent no.3 herein, and who was the respondent
no.1 before the Employee's Compensation Commissioner below. The
deceased Pradeep was employed by the respondent no.3 herein for
driving his vehicle being Maruti Ritz passenger car bearing no. HR-
55T-5284 and which was plying as a Taxi. On 16.6.2016, an accident
took place of this vehicle near Air Force Radar Station, Nazafgarh-
Dhansa Road and which resulted in death of the driver/deceased
Pradeep. When the accident took place it was around midnight and as
a result of the accident, not only the driver Pradeep but also a
passenger Dinesh Kumar died, and who were declared brought dead by
the RTRM Hospital. The subject claim petition was therefore filed by
the claimants/respondent nos. 1 and 2.
4. Respondent no.3 herein, the employer had filed his written
statement pleading that he had already sold the vehicle under an
agreement dated 30.12.2014 to the deceased Pradeep. It was hence
denied that there is any relationship of employer and employee
between the respondent no.3 and the deceased Pradeep. However, in
the cross-examination, the respondent no.3 herein, respondent no.1
before the Employee's Compensation Commissioner, conceded that
the subject car was financed by the HDFC Bank and that not only no
NOC was taken from HDFC Bank for the sale of the vehicle but in fact
even an intimation was not given to HDFC Bank for sale of the
vehicle. In fact, what is more crucial to be noted is that the present
appellant/insurance company processed the claim and settled the claim
on account of accident of the vehicle and paid the money under the
subject policy directly to the financer/HDFC Bank and the remaining
installments due to the financer/HDFC Bank were paid by the
respondent no.3 herein. The respondent no.3 herein also admitted in
the cross-examination that he continued to be the registered owner of
the car and that no information whatsoever was given by him to the
Motor Transport Authority at Gurgaon where the vehicle was
registered as regards the sale of vehicle by the respondent no.3 to the
deceased Pradeep.
5. On behalf of the appellant/insurance company it is argued
that there was no relationship of employer and employee between the
deceased Pradeep and the respondent no.3 herein because the
respondent no.1 in his written statement had stated that there was an
agreement to sale the vehicle on 30.12.2014 to the deceased Pradeep.
Reliance is placed upon Section 2 sub-section 30 of the Motor Vehicles
Act to argue that since the owner of the vehicle has changed, there no
longer remains the relationship of employer and employee.
6. In my opinion, the arguments urged on behalf of the
appellant completely lacks substance. Firstly it is seen that Section 2
sub-section 30 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 defines an owner to
mean a registered owner i.e a person in whose name the vehicle is
registered. Admittedly, the vehicle was registered in the name of the
respondent no.3 herein and who hence continued to remain the owner.
Secondly, as per the definition of owner under Section 2 sub-section 30
where the vehicle is under a hire-purchase or an agreement of lease or
an agreement of hypothecation, then, the person in possession of the
vehicle under that agreement is an owner, and in the present case on
the date of the accident, the vehicle in question was financed by the
HDFC Bank and the vehicle under the financed agreement was in
possession of the respondent no.3 herein. Therefore, the provision of
Section 2 sub-section 30 of the Motor Vehicles Act in fact does not
help the appellant but in fact goes against the appellant in the facts of
the present case and it is seen that as per the facts of the present case
the owner of the vehicle on the date of the accident was respondent
no.3 herein. In fact, in my opinion, the appellant having not even
contested the claim petition before the Employee's Compensation
Commissioner below, and also the fact that the appellant itself paid the
amount under the insurance policy to the financing company/HDFC
Bank taking the respondent no.3 herein to be an owner of the vehicle,
hence the appellant is estopped from arguing that respondent no.3 was
not the owner of the vehicle and that there was no relationship of
employer and employee between the respondent no.3 herein and the
deceased Pradeep.
7. No substantial question of law arises under Section 30 of
the Employee's Compensation Act for this appeal to be entertained.
Dismissed.
MAY 30, 2017/ib VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J
