Dismissed

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Komal and Another

Allahabad HC1 Sept 2022FAFO/143/1999

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In First Appeal, the High Court examined the insurer's challenge to the Workmen Compensation Commissioner's finding of death during employment and dismissed the appeal as lacking merit since the finding was based on proper appreciation of evidence without a substantial question of law.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Komal and… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 38

¶2

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 143 of 1999

¶3

Appellant :- The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Respondent :- Smt. Komal And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Amresh Sinha,Amresh Rai Counsel for Respondent :- S. Sharma

¶4

Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

¶6

The present appeal has been directed by the appellantinsurance company against the award dated 11.12.1998 passed by the Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Muzaffar Nagar (hereinafter referred to as 'Commissioner') in Case No.4 of 1998 whereby the Commissioner has awarded Rs.1,97,060/along with 12% interest as compensation to the claimants/respondents for the death of Krishna Pal, who was said to be driver of offending vehicle namely, Truck No.H.Y.O1752.

¶7

Challenging the aforesaid award, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the finding of the Commissioner that deceased had died during the course of employment is perverse and not sustainable in law and based upon misappreciation of evidence on record. It is further contended that the owner of the truck in his statement has stated that deceased has taken the truck to his home and deceased has not died during the course of employment, but in statement before the Commissioner, the owner of the truck has changed the version from what he has stated in the written statement and has admitted the fact that deceased had died during the course of employment. It is further contended that the Commissioner has erred in believing the statement of owner of the truck which was contrary to the case set up by the owner of the truck in the written statement.

¶8

I have considered the argument of learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record.

¶9

The finding of the Commissioner reveals that the it is not only the testimony of the owner which was believed by the Commissioner in recording a finding that the death of the deceased had occurred during the course of employment. As a matter of fact, the Commissioner has considered other evidence on record namely, statement of claimant and no evidence rebutting the statement of claimants has been produced by the

¶10

appellant-insurance company.

¶11

In such view of the fact, this Court finds that the finding returned by the Commissioner on the issue that deceased had died during the course of employment is based upon proper appreciation of evidence on record, and as there is no substantial question of law in the present appeal, therefore, finding returned by the Commissioner being finding of fact does not call for any interference by this Court in appeal.

¶12

Accordingly, appeal lacks merit and is dismissed with no order as to costs.

¶13

Order Date :- 1.9.2022 Sattyarth

¶14

Digitally signed by SATTYARTH ANAND Date: 2022.09.01 17:03:11 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Komal and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Komal and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Vimla Devi and Others Vs M/S. A.B.C. India Ltd. T.R. Polan Road and Another

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Muzaffarnagar Vs Smt. Savitri Devi and Others

United India Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Ram Ji Lal and Others

United India Insurance Co. through Br. Manager Vs Smt. Sureshwati and Others

Kaju Gupta Vs the Bundelkhand Motor Transport Co. and Others

Smt. Vidya Devi and Another Vs Surendra Singh and Others