Rajasthan High Court
United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Narendra Singh And Another on 8 February, 2024
Author: Praveer Bhatnagar
Bench: Praveer Bhatnagar
[2023:RJ-JP:40575]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 736/2012
United India Insurance Company, M.I. Road, Paanch Batti, Jaipur
through Manager, Regional Office Sahara Chamber, Tonk Road,
Jaipur.
----Appellant/Opposite Party
Versus
1. Narendra Singh alias Ninda Singh S/o Late Shri Bua Singh,
age 47 years,
2. Smt. Devi alias Shakuntala W/o Shri Narendra Singh alias
Ninda Singh, age 43 years,
Both residents of Village Kotli Harchanda, Thana Kahanuwan,
District Gurudaspur, Punjab.
----Respondents/Claimants
3. Seependra D. Kasliwal S/o Shri Dharamchand Kasliwal, R/o
Plot No. 143, Sector 11-A, Gandhi Dham, Kutch, District Kutch,
Gujarat.
----Respondent/Non-Claimant
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Amarnath Pareek
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vinay Mathur
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR
Judgment
08/02/2024
1. The short questions involved in the present appeal are:-
(1) Whether the Employer is liable to pay a penalty to
the victim under the Workman Compensation Act if the
driving licence of the deceased employee is found to
be fake?
[2023:RJ-JP:40575] (2 of 4) [CMA-736/2012]
(2) Whether the learned Commissioner has rightly
assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.4,000/-per
month?
2. In the present appeal, the appellant Insurance Company was
directed to pay the compensation to the legal heirs of the
deceased, who at the time of the accident was driving the
employee's vehicle and respondent No.2 Employer was
exonerated.
3. The factual facets regarding the occurrence of an accident
resulting in death of the deceased, the vehicle duly insured with
the appellant Insurance Company and the driving licence of the
deceased found to be fake are not in dispute.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant fervently contended that
the impugned award exonerating the employer is erroneous. He
placed reliance on the following judgments:-
1. Beli Ram V. Rajinder Kumar & Anr. : 2020 ACJ 3000
2. Neelam Devi V. Davendra Singh Yadav : 2006 ACJ 139
DB (MP)
3. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Davinder Singh :
2008 ACJ 1 (SC)
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents
vehemently endorsed the impugned award and to bolster their
argument put reliance on the following Judgments:-
1. National Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Geeta Bhat : (2008)
ACC 341 (SC)
2. National Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Swaran Singh :
(2004) 3 SCC 297
6. Question No. (1):-
Whether the Employer is liable to pay a penalty to the
victim under the Workman Compensation Act if the
driving licence of the deceased employee is found to
be fake?
[2023:RJ-JP:40575] (3 of 4) [CMA-736/2012]
The judgments relied upon by the appellant are entirely
different in the factual matrix. In the judgment of Beli Ram
(supra), the driving licence of the employee expired and the owner
did not make an effort to get it validated.
7. In United India Insurance Co. Ltd V. Lehru & Ors. : AIR 2003
SC 1292 and in National Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Swaran Singh &
Ors. : AIR 2004 SC 1531, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the
owner has no means to verify the genuineness of the driver's
license produced before him, provided that the owner finds the
driver is competent to drive the vehicle. Hence, once the appellant
has deposed that he had taken a test of the driver before
employing him, he has taken sufficient precaution before
employment. Therefore, there could not be any direction to
recover the amount from the appellant.
8. The above view has been followed in the matter of Civil
Appeal No. 4919/2022 (Arising Out of SLP (CIVIL)
NO.24933/2019) : Rishi Pal Singh V. New India Assurance Co.
Ltd., wherein, it was reiterated that:-
"The owner of the vehicle is expected to verify the driving
skills and not run to the licensing authority to verify the
genuineness of the driving license before appointing a
driver. Therefore, once the owner is satisfied that the driver
is competent to drive the vehicle, it is not expected from
the owner thereafter to verify the genuineness of the
driving license issued to the driver."
9. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the learned
Commissioner has rightly fastened the liability over the Insurance
Company and exonerated the respondent No.3 from the liability.
10. Question No.(2) :-
Whether the learned Commissioner has rightly assessed the
income of the deceased as Rs.4,000/- per month?
[2023:RJ-JP:40575] (4 of 4) [CMA-736/2012]
Learned Commissioner has dealt with this point at Issue No.4
and after considering subsequent increase in Dearness Allowance
computed the award @ Rs.4,000/- per month. Learned
Commissioner was of the opinion that though the salary of
deceased at the time of his death was Rs.42,000/- per annum but
due to subsequent increase in the rate of Dearness Allowance the
claimants are entitled to get the amount presuming the salary of
the deceased @ Rs.4,000/- per month.
11. In view of the above, I don't find any perversity in the
findings arrived at by the learned Commissioner.
12. Consequently, I find no merit in the appeal and the same is,
therefore, dismissed.
(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J
ASHWINI KUMAR CHOUHAN /680
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
