Branch Manager vs Most. Basmati Devi (Mahato)
2023 Latest Caselaw 1061 Jhar

                                                   1                     M.A. No. 11 of 2010



                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                             M.A. No. 11 of 2010
            1.   Branch Manager, The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Nasik, Maharastra
            2.   Branch Manager, The New India Assurance Company Ltd., Hazaribagh
                                                               ... Appellants
                                      -Versus-

            1.   Most. Basmati Devi (Mahato)
            2.   Dulari Kumari
            3.   Nageshwar Mahato
            4.   Manager, Spectrum Ethers Ltd.                   ... Respondents

                                           -----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

-----

            For the Appellants      : Mr. G.C. Jha, Advocate
            For Respondent No.1     : Mr. Shahid Khan, Advocate
            For Respondent No.4     : Mr. Kumar Nischay, Advocate
                                           -----

17/02.03.2023     Heard Mr. G.C. Jha, learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Shahid

Khan, learned counsel for respondent no.1 and Mr. Kumar Nischay,learned

counsel for respondent no.4.

2. Notices upon respondent nos. 2 and 3 have been validly served and

the matter was adjourned with a view to provide one more opportunity to

them on 16.02.2023, however till date respondent nos. 2 and 3 have not

appeared and in that view of the matter, in their absence this appeal has

been heard.

3. Being dissatisfied with the judgment/award passed by the Workmen's

Compensation Commissioner, Hazaribagh dated 06.07.2009 in W.C. Case

No.58/2007, the present appeal has been filed by the insurance company.

4. The said W.C. Case was filed by the claimants considering that the

deceased namely Karu Mahto @ Kamdeo Mahato died on 08.12.2005 while

discharging his duty with respondent no.4. The learned Workmen's

Compensation Commissioner, Hazaribag has awarded sum of Rs.2,81,320/-

in favour of the claimants and further directed if the award is not satisfied

within 60 days, simple interest @ 7% will be payable.

5. Mr. G.C. Jha, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the

deceased was not covered under the insurance policy and the learned

Commissioner has wrongly passed the order. He further submits that the

deceased was not coming within the meaning of Section 2(n) of the

Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. On this ground, he submits that this

appeal may kindly be allowed.

6. On the other hand, Mr. Shahid Khan, learned counsel for the

claimants submits that the insurance policy was filed and in the insurance

policy, the insurance was taken for 8 persons not named in the said policy

and the deceased was coming within those 8 persons and in that view of

the matter, the learned Commissioner has rightly passed the award.

7. In view of the above facts and submissions of the learned counsel for

the parties, the Court has gone through the judgment/award passed by the

learned Commissioner and finds that the learned Commissioner has

considered terms and conditions of the policy, which was brought on record

and found that the policy was taken for 8 unknown persons and the

deceased was coming within those 8 persons. The employer has also

admitted that the deceased has come within those unknown 8 persons.

Nothing has been proved whether the policy was taken for the deceased or

not and the onus lies on the person, who take such plea to prove the case,

which is lacking in the case in hand. In that view of the matter, the

argument of Mr. G.C. Jha, learned counsel for the appellants is not

accepted.

8. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

9. The amount deposited by the insurance company, if not disbursed in

favour of the claimants, will be disbursed in their favour forthwith.

10. Let the L.C.R. be sent back to the concerned learned court forthwith.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Ajay/