Orissa High Court
Bhagabati Tandi And Others vs M/S.Tuli Construction Company on 1 August, 2024
Author: B. P. Routray
Bench: B. P. Routray
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
FAO No.103 of 2018
Bhagabati Tandi and others .... Appellants
Mr. J. Sahu, Advocate
-versus-
M/s.Tuli Construction Company, .... Respondents
Bargarh and another
Mr. S. Hota, Advocate for Respondent No.1
Mr. B. Dasmohapatra, Advocate for Respondent No.2
CORAM:
JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
01.08.2024
Order No.
14. 1. Heard Mr. J. Sahu, learned counsel for the Appellants-
claimants, Mr. S. Hota, learned counsel for Respondent No.1-
employer and Mr. B. Dasmohapatra, learned counsel for
Respondent No.2-Insurnace Company.
2. Present appeal by the claimants is directed against the award
dated 18.04.2017 passed in E.C. Case No.25 of 2004 by the
Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation-cum-Asst. Labour
Commissioner, Sambalpur, wherein compensation to the tune of
Rs.3,05,613/- has been granted to the claimants-Appellants on
account of death of the deceased in course of and arising out of
his employment as a driver in the Truck bearing Regd. No.OR-
15-6273 belonging to Respondent No.1.
Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 02-Aug-2024 15:03:35
3. The claimants filed W.C. Case No.25/2004 praying for
compensation. In the said case, they adduced their evidence and
the Insurance Company as well as the owner both have contested
it. Upon adjudication, the Commissioner disposed of the claim
case vide judgment and award dated 27.09.2010 granting
compensation to the tune of Rs.4,39,900/- payable by the
employer. Subsequently, the employer filed a recall petition
appending a valid insurance policy of the vehicle in which the
deceased was an employee. The Commissioner upon accepting
the recall application passed a fresh award granting compensation
to the tune of Rs.3,05,613/- without discussing anything about
quantum of compensation granted in favour of the claimants in
the earlier award. Such approach of the Commissioner to pass a
fresh award by recalling the earlier award upon his whim is
unsustainable in the eye of law.
4. As per Mr. Dasmohapatra, learned counsel for Respondent
No.2, once the award is passed by the Commissioner, he became
functus officio and therefore, he has no authority to proceed
further in the matter. Such argument advanced by Mr. Mohapatra
has substance and this Court taking note of the conduct of the
Commissioner in proceeding to pass a fresh award, sets aside the
award dated 18.04.2017.
5. Admittedly, the coverage of insurance in respect of death of the
deceased as an employee of the truck on the date of accident is
not disputed by the Insurance Company. The validity of the
Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 02-Aug-2024 15:03:35
Insurance Certificate is left unquestioned. Thus the liability on the
part of the Insurance Company is confirmed. As the
Commissioner has determined the quantum in his award dated
27.9.2010 assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.4000/- per
month and applying the age factor of 219.95, this Court does find
any reason to interfere in determination of the amount of
compensation and confirms the same with direction to the insurer
to pay the compensation amount along with interest @12% per
annum from the date of accident.
6. It is mentioned here that, the insurer has never questioned
either of the awards, which implies that they have neither
disputed the accident nor the employment of the deceased as
concluded by the Commissioner.
7. The direction of the Commissioner to pay the penal interest
@12% is waived.
8. The appeal is disposed of as allowed.
9. An urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
B.K. Barik
Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 02-Aug-2024 15:03:35
