The Branch Manager vs P.Senthilkumar
2021 Latest Caselaw 4217 Mad

                                                                                 C.M.A.(MD)No.159 of 2021


                              BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
                                                    DATED: 18.02.2021
                                                       CORAM:
                                   THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU
                                               C.M.A.(MD)No.159 of 2021
                                             and CMP.(MD)No.1359 of 2021

                     The Branch Manager,
                     M/S.Chola General
                     Insurance Company Ltd.,
                     Top Complex, 2nd Floor,
                     Contonment,
                     Trichy-620001                                 ... Appellant / 2nd respondent

                                                           Vs.
                     1.P.Senthilkumar
                     2.P.Gunasekaran
                     3.P.Latha                                ... Respondents 1 to 3/Petitioners


                     4.A.Backiaraj                               ...4th respondent/1st Respondent

                     PRAYER: This Appeal filed under Section 30(1) of the Employees
                     Compensation Act, 1923, to set aside the fair order passed in W.C.No.110 of
                     2017 on the file of the Commissioner of Workmen Compensation (Deputy
                     Commissioner of Labour), Trichirappalli dated 02.03.2020.


                                    For appellant      : Mrs.K.R.Shivashankari




                     1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                     C.M.A.(MD)No.159 of 2021


                                                           JUDGMENT

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against award passed in

W.C.No.110 of 2017 on the file of the Commissioner of Workmen

Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Trichirappalli, dated

02.03.2020.

2.The brief facts of the case are as follows:

The fourth respondent herein took a sub-contract of laying 'Thar Road'

on the Alampatti-Muthanampatti Road and on the fateful day, the fourth

respondent herein as owner of the vehicle bearing Registration

No.TN-45-BX-9837 drove the vehicle, where the deceased Mariammal

travelled as a load woman and on completion of the work, when they were

returning, due to the rash and negligent driving of the owner/driver of the

vehicle, the vehicle lost its control and turned upside down, by which the

claimants' mother, the deceased Mariammal sustained grievous injury and she

was taken to the hospital and while admitting to the hospital, the Doctor has

declared that she died and an F.I.R was registered in Crime No.342 of 2017.

The claimants had filed a claim petition in W.C.No.110 of 2017 on the file of

the Commissioner of Workmen Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of

Labour), Trichirappalli, seeking compensation.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.(MD)No.159 of 2021

3. Before the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Tiruchirappalli, on the

side of the claimants one witness was examined as P.W.1 and fifteen documents

were marked as Ex.P1 to 15.

4. After considering all the materials and evidences, the Deputy

Commissioner of Labour, Tiruchirappalli, held that the accident occurred

during the course of employment where the deceased was a load woman. The

learned Judge finding that the vehicle being insured with the

appellant/Insurance Company, directed the Insurance Company to pay the

compensation at the first instance and recover the same from the owner of the

vehicle.

5. Challenging the said award, the appellant/Insurance Company has

preferred this appeal challenging the liability as well as quantum.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Insurance Company

would contend that the deceased travelled in the insured goods vehicle as a

gratuitous passenger and therefore, the Insurance Company is not at all liable to

pay compensation and further, when there is no documentary evidence, the

Commissioner ought not to have fixed the monthly income of the deceased at

Rs.8000/- and therefore, the award passed by the Commissioner is liable to be

set aside.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.(MD)No.159 of 2021

7. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the

appellant/Insurance Company and perused the materials available on record.

8. With regard to liability, the Commissioner based on the statement

given by one John Peter, who travelled along with the deceased and based on

which, the FIR was registered, came to the conclusion that the accident

happened during the course of employment and it was happened due to the rash

and negligent driving of the owner of the vehicle and by relying on various

judgments of the Honourable Apex Court, ordered pay and recovery, where I do

not find any infirmity.

9. In respect of quantum also, the Commissioner has taken only a sum of

Rs.8,000/- as monthly income after finding that the deceased is a load woman

and the accident is of the year 2017, which in my opinion is very low.

Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere with the same also.

10.In view of the above, I do not find any question of law much less any

substantial question of law arises for consideration in this Civil Miscellaneous

Appeal.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.(MD)No.159 of 2021

11. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and the

award, dated 02.03.2020 made in W.C.No.110 of 2017 on the file of the

Commissioner of Workmen Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour),

Trichirappalli, is confirmed. The appellant/Insurance Company is directed to

pay the award amount to the claimants at the first instance and thereafter,

recover the same from the fourth respondent/owner of the vehicle. The

appellant/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire award amount

with accrued interests and costs, within a period of six weeks from the date of

receipt of a copy of this order, if not already deposited and on such deposit

being made, the claimants are permitted to withdraw their share as apportioned

by the Commissioner with accrued interests and costs, less the amount already

withdrawn if any, by filing a proper application before the Commissioner.

No Costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

18.02.2021

gns/pm Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No

Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.(MD)No.159 of 2021

To

1.The Commissioner of Workmen Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Trichirappalli.

2.The Record Keeper, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.(MD)No.159 of 2021

J.NISHA BANU,J.

gns/pm

C.M.A.(MD)No.159 of 2021

18.02.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.M.A.(MD)No.159 of 2021

18.02.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/