National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Smt. Rebati Das And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 2981 Ori

                  HIGH COURT OF ORISSA: CUTTACK

                            F.A.O. No.475 OF 2013

       In the matter of an Appeal under Section 30 of the
       Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.
                                  -----------
       National Insurance Co. Ltd.,
       represented through its
       Officer-in-charge, Orissa Legal Cell,
       Cantonment Road, Cuttack-1.
                                         ....                   Appellant

                                             Versus

       Smt. Rebati Das and others.          ....                Respondents


               For Appellant         ...     M/s. Amitav Das,
                                           Mr. H.K. Mahali,
                                           Mr. M.M. Das and
                                           Mr. S. Das

               For Respondents       ...     None

                            JUDGMENT

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE BISWANATH RATH

Date of Hearing and Judgment : 01.03.2021

Biswanath Rath, J. This appeal involves a challenge to the

judgment in E.C. Case No.19/2012 passed by the

Commissioner for Workmen Compensation-cum-Assistant

Labour Commissioner, Angul, solely on the aspect of decision

involving Issue No.'c' by the Commissioner.

2. Heard Sri Amitav Das, learned counsel for the

appellant-Insurance Company. In spite of notice, nobody

appears for either the claimants or the owner.

3. Advancing his submission Sri Das, learned counsel

referring to the discussion on the Issue No.'c' submitted that

there is no material to establish the salary component of the

driver at the relevant point of time so also the fooding

allowance as claimed by the claimants and supported through

evidence by employer, opposite party no.1. It is in the

circumstance, Sri Das submitted that taking the salary

component at Rs.9,000/- per month will be much higher side

than it is actually paid at the relevant point of time and thus a

request is made for reducing the compensation awarded by

the Commissioner in respect of the deceased driver.

4. Considering the submission of Sri Das and entering

into the plea of the parties particularly the claimants and the

owner, this Court finds though the claimants claimed the

deceased to have been receiving Rs.8,000/- per month

besides Rs.100/- per day as fooding allowance working as a

driver, however the owner has come forward to say that he

was paying the deceased a monthly remuneration of

Rs.6,000/- besides the owner stated to have been paying

Rs.100/- to the driver towards fooding allowance. Even

though the owner has thrown light on the payment aspect,

but the opposite party no.2, the Insurance Company, even

they entered into cross-examination, this Court finds, in the

attempt for cross-examination, opposite party no.2 could not

be able to throw any light on the salary of the deceased.

There is even no attempt to at least to bring any evidence in

support of their case involving the normal salary of the driver

of the truck at the relevant point of time.

5. In the context involved herein and the matter

being decided through the oral evidence having part support

of the owner to the claim of the claimants and particularly in

absence of any evidence to contradict the statement of owner

on this aspect, this Court finds, the Commissioner had no

other option than to accept the statement of the owner on the

wage aspect as well as fooding allowance of the driver. It is in

this view of the matter this Court finds, there is no illegality in

deciding the Issue No.'c' by the Commissioner. This Court,

therefore is not inclined to entertain the challenge to the

judgment involved herein.

6. For the non-appearance of the claimants and as

the compensation amount is already in deposit before the

Commissioner, this Court while directing the Commissioner to

release the compensation amount along with accrued interest

as on date in favour of the claimants, also considers the fact

that delay has already taken place in the meantime and

claimants since did not enter appearance, the Insurance

Company is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1,000/- before

the Commissioner along with copy of the judgment of this

Court within a period of two weeks, for enabling the

Commissioner to issue Special Messenger notice to the

claimants to attend his office to receive the compensation

amount.

7. For the observation of this Court hereinabove, the

appeal sans merit, the same thus stands dismissed. No cost.

............................................. BISWANATH RATH, J.

Orissa High Court, Cuttack.

Dated 1st day of March, 2021/Uks, PA