Karnataka High Court
Smt. Arati, W/O.Anil Lad vs V Kotresh S/O Obaiah on 9 July, 2021
Author: P.Krishna Bhat
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF JULY 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. KRISHNA BHAT
MFA NO.21984 OF 2009 (WC)
C/W
MFA NO.21985 OF 2009
IN MFA NO.21984 OF 2009
BETWEEN
SMT. ARATI W/O.ANIL LAD
PROPRIETRIX
M/S V.S.L.ENTERPRISES,
HOUSE OF LAD, PALACE ROAD,
SANDUR, BELLARY.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.V.F.KUMBAR, SRI. R.S.PATIL &
SRI. BENNUR SOMANNA, ADVOCATES)
AND
1. SRI. H.SATHYAPPA, S/O.H.MALLAPPA
AGE:30 YEARS,
R/O KUKANUR VILLAGE,
TQ & DIST:KOPPAL
2. M/S ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
EUREKA JUNCTION, CLUB ROAD,
DESHPANDE NAGAR, HUBLI-29
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. Y. LAKSHMIKANT REDDY, ADV., FOR R1;
SRI. NAGARAJ C KOLLOORI, ADV., FOR R2)
2
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1) OF W.C. ACT PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED:31.01.2009 PASSED IN
WC.No.166/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER AND
COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION, KOPPAL.
IN MFA NO.21985 OF 2009
BETWEEN
SMT. ARATI W/O.ANIL LAD
PROPRIETRIX
M/S V.S.L.ENTERPRISES,
HOUSE OF LAD, PALACE ROAD,
SANDUR, BELLARY.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.V.F.KUMBAR, SRI. R.S.PATIL &
SRI. BENNUR SOMANNA, ADVOCATES)
AND
1. SRI. V. KOTRESH S/o. OBAIAH
AGE:28 YEARS,
R/O KUKANUR VILLAGE,
TQ & DIST:KOPPAL
2. M/S ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
EUREKA JUNCTION, CLUB ROAD,
DESHPANDE NAGAR, HUBLI-29
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. Y. LAKSHMIKANT REDDY, ADV., FOR R1;
m/s. KALLUKA LAW CHAMBERS FOR R2;
SRI. NAGARAJ C KOLLOORI, ADV., FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1) OF W.C. ACT PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 31.01.2009 PASSED IN
WC.No.167/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE LABOUR OFFICER AND
COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION, KOPPAL.
3
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
These appeals are by the insured calling in question the
legality of the award dated 31.01.2009 in WC No.166/2006 and
WC No.167/2006 passed by the learned Labour Officer and
Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Koppal (for short
"the Commissioner").
2. Brief facts are that claimant-Satyappa was working
as a driver and claimant-V.Kotresh was working as a cleaner in
lorry bearing registration No.KA-35/6297 owned by respondent
No.1-VSL Enterprises and insured with respondent No.2-ICICI
Lombard General Insurance Company Limited. On 18.03.2006,
when the claimant-Satyappa was driving the lorry in question
with claimant-V. Kotresh who was cleaner, as per the
instructions of respondent No.1, accident took place and the
claimants suffered injuries.
3. Respondent No.1 filed a written statement admitting
the employer-employee relationship between itself and the
claimants and further that the accident resulting in injuries took
place arising out of and in the course of employment.
4. Respondent No.2-insurance company filed separate
written statement denying the material averments made in the
claim petitions.
5. During the enquiry, claimants examined themselves
as PW1 and PW2 and one qualified medical practitioner
Dr.Vishwaprasad was examined as PW3. Ex.P1 to Ex.P9 were
also marked. The insurance company examined one of its
officials as RW1.
6. Learned Commissioner, upon consideration of the
materials, passed an award granting compensation of
Rs.91,102/- to claimant No.1 and Rs.1,71,131/- to claimant No.2
and directed respondent No.1-VSL Enterprises to pay the
compensation amount and exonerated the insurance company
from liability.
7. In these appeals, the appellants have filed an
application under Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 along with policy of insurance issued by
respondent No.2 covering the risk of the lorry bearing
registration No.KA-35/6297. The contention of the appellants is
that since the policy of insurance issued by respondent No.2 was
in operation at the time of the accident, the insurance company
is liable to reimburse the compensation.
8. There is no dispute about the fact that the document
produced along with the application filed under Order XLI Rule
27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is a policy issued in
respect of vehicle in question and therefore, policy coverage was
there covering the risk of both the claimants. Under such
circumstances, the appeals are entitled to be allowed by
directing the insurance company to pay the compensation
awarded by the learned Commissioner. Hence, the following:
ORDER
The appeals are allowed in part.
The appellant in both the appeals shall pay the
amount of compensation determined by the learned
Commissioner with interest thereon and later shall
claim reimbursement of the same from respondent
No.2-insurance company, which respondent No.2-
insurance company shall honour.
The amount in deposit, if any, be transmitted
to the jurisdictional Court of the learned Senior Civil
Judge along with records, forthwith.
In view of disposal of the appeal, pending
interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for
consideration.
Sd/-
JUDGE
yan
