The Oriental Inssurance Company ... vs Mr.K.Sekhar Reddy Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 3502 Tel

     THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI


      CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO.951 OF 2007


                          JUDGMENT

This is an Appeal filed by the Oriental Insurance Company

Limited against the order passed in W.C.No.118 of 2004

dt.14.05.2007 by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation

and Assistant Commissioner of Labour-1 at Hyderabad.

2. Brief facts leading to filing of this Appeal are that the applicant

before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation was

employed as a driver by Opposite Party No.1 on his lorry bearing

No.AP 9V 2082. While he was driving the said lorry on 28.07.2003

from Uppal to Begumpet at about 4.30 A.M., there was an accident,

due to which the lorry was completely damaged and the applicant

sustained fractures to vertebral of spinal cord and other injuries on

face, left dorsum of hand. Immediately he was shifted to a hospital at

Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad and an operation was conducted on

01.08.2003 for the fractures and after discharge from the said hospital,

he was completely bedridden.

3. The applicant therefore filed an Application before the

Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation seeking a compensation

of Rs.5,00,000/-. The applicant had also stated that he was being paid

Rs.5,000/- per month as wages besides batta of Rs.100/- per day and

that he was aged about 24 years at the time of the accident. The

Commissioner awarded compensation of Rs.2,83,810/- by adopting

wages at Rs.3,595/- and the disability compensation as well as loss of

earning capacity at 60%. Against this award, the insurance company is

in appeal before this Court mainly on the against finding given by the

Commissioner that there is employee and employer relationship

between the applicant and the 1st Opposite Party.

4. After hearing both parties, this Court finds that Opposite Party

No.1 had remained ex parte before the Commissioner and though

Opposite Party No.2 had denied the employer and employee

relationship between the applicant and Opposite Party No.1, the

Commissioner has taken into consideration the certificate issued by

the S.I. of Police, P.S. Mahankali under Ex.A2 to hold that the

applicant was the driver of the subject vehicle at the time of accident

and since there was no denial by Opposite Party No.1, the

Commissioner has held that the employer and employee relationship

has been established. Even at this stage, the insurance company has

not been able to rebut this finding of the Commissioner with any

evidence to the contrary.

5. Therefore, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No

order as to costs.

6. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in this CMA shall also

stand dismissed.

___________________________ JUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI Date: 16.11.2021 Svv