Madras High Court
The National Insurance Company ... vs Thiru Kumar @ Jayakumar on 21 January, 2021
C.M.A.No.127 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 21-01-2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
CMA No.127 of 2021
And
CMP No.833 of 2021
The National Insurance Company Ltd.,
110, J.N.Street,
Pondicherry-1. .. Appellant
vs.
1.Thiru Kumar @ Jayakumar
2.Thiru A.Veeramani .. Respondents
PRAYER : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred under Section 30 of the
Workmen Compensation Act, against the Award dated 13.07.2007 made in
W.C.No.372 of 2006 on the file of the Deputy Commissioner of Labour-II,
Chennai.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Vadivel
For Respondent-2 : No Appearance
1/8
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.127 of 2021
JUDGMENT
The Award dated 13.07.2007 passed in W.C.No.372 of 2006 by
the Deputy Commissioner of Labour-II, Chennai, is under challenge in the
present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
2. The National Insurance Company Limited is the appellant and
the question of law raised in the present appeal is that whether the Deputy
Commissioner of Labour is right in fixing the loss of earning capacity of the
applicant as it is the percentage of disability assessed by Doctor AW-2;
whether the concept of physical disability and loss of earning capacity are
one and the same when admittedly the injuries suffered by the claimant are
not schedule injuries; whether the Deputy Commissioner of Labour
followed the principles laid down in Explanation II Section 4(1)(C)(ii); and
whether the Deputy Commissioner of Labour followed the principles laid
down in Explanation II of Section 4 (1)(b) while fixing the maximum salary
of Rs.4,000/- as fixed by the Central Government with reference to Section
4-A of the Employees Compensation Act.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.127 of 2021
3. Though the question of law mostly related to the factual
aspects, this Court is of the opinion that fixation of salary by the Deputy
Commissioner of Labour as Rs.4,000/- based on the Central Government
Notification is correct or not.
4. The respondents/claimants filed an application under Section
10 (1) of the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923, seeking compensation on
the ground that Mr.Jayakumar was employed as a Driver with
Mr.Veeramani and while driving the Ambassador Car bearing Registration
No.TN-51-A-3555, he met with an accident on 06.06.2006. The said Driver-
Mr.Jayakumar sustained grievous injuries and consequently admitted as
inpatient in the Hospital on 06.06.2006 and discharged on 16.06.2006. A
criminal case was registered against the Driver in Crime No.503 of 2006
punishable under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC. The abovesaid Jayakumar
filed an application, seeking compensation.
5. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour adjudicated the issues
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.127 of 2021
with reference to the documents and the evidences produced by the
respective parties.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant-Insurance
Company made a submission that the claimant has not established his
monthly income by an acceptable evidence and therefore, fixation of
Rs.4,000/- as monthly salary for grant of compensation is incorrect. It is
contended that in the absence of any evidence, the Deputy Commissioner of
Labour ought not to have fixed the salary of the claimant as Rs.4,000/-.
7. Regarding the accident, the same was established and the
Deputy Commissioner of Labour rightly relied on the First Information
Report as well as the Wound Certificate issued by the Government Hospital
at Cuddalore.
8. There is no dispute regarding the policy coverage. When the
claimant has established the factum regarding the accident and further the
Insurance Policy Coverage was also established. This Court is of an opinion
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.127 of 2021
that the question of law raised in this regard deserves no merit
consideration. As far as the fixation of monthly income is concerned, the
Central Government under Section 4-A of the Employees Compensation
Act, fixed the salary as Rs.4,000/- per month for the purpose of grant of
compensation. When the minimum wages are fixed as Rs.4,000/- during the
relevant point of time. Even in the absence of any proof on the side of the
claimant, the minimum ceiling is to be fixed for computation of
compensation. Therefore, the ground raised in this regard deserves no merit
consideration as the Central Government fixed the minimum wages for the
workmen as Rs.4,000/- during the relevant point of time under the
provisions of the Statute and there is no irregularity, as such and the Deputy
Commissioner of Labour has rightly fixed the monthly income of the
claimant as Rs.4,000/- and awarded compensation.
9. Under these circumstances, the Award dated 13.07.2007 passed
in W.C. No.372 of 2006 by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour-II,
Chennai, stands confirmed and consequently, Civil Miscellaneous Appeal
No.127 of 2021 stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.127 of 2021
costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.
21-01-2021
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order.
Internet : Yes/No.
Index: Yes/No.
Svn
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.127 of 2021
To
The Deputy Commissioner of Labour-II,
Chennai.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.A.No.127 of 2021
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Svn
C.M.A.No.127 of 2021
21-01-2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
