Dismissed

The New India Assurance Co.Ltd v. Thiru Ranganathan

Madras HC5 Dec 2016CMA/2723/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court dismissed insurance company's appeal against an award of Rs.33,045 compensation under Workmen's Compensation Act. Held appeal unmeritorious due to significant delay and undisputed accident facts. Ordered legal representatives permitted to claim deposited amount upon proof.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed without costs. Legal representatives of deceased claimant permitted to withdraw deposited compensation if they satisfy authority of their representation.

The New India Assurance Co.Ltd Vs Thiru… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 05.12.2016

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N. SESHASAYEE

¶6

C.M.A.No.2723 of 2003 and CMP.No.3136 of 2004

¶7

The New India Assurance Company Limited, Annapoorna Building, Main Road, Mettupalayam, Coimbatore.

¶8

.. Appellant

¶9

Vs 1.Ranganathan 2.R.Sadhasivam .. Respondents

¶10

Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal preferred under Section 30 of the Workmens' Compensation Act 1923 against the order dated 3^rd May 1993 made in W.C.No.98 of 1992 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmens' Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour) Coimbatore.

¶11

For Appellant : Mr.M.Krishnamoorthy For Respondents : R1 – Died R2 – No appearance

¶12

JUDGMENT

¶13

The Insurance Company has preferred this appeal challenging the order of Commissioner of Workmens' Compenation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour) Coimbatore in W.C.No.98 of 1992.

¶14

¶15

This appeal is filed by the insurance company whereunder it challenges the order of the Deputy Commissioner Labour passed under Workmen Compensation Act. The short sketch of the facts that leads to this appeal is that the claimant/first respondent, who is reported dead during the pendency of this appeal in 2007, was working as a conductor in a Lorry Transport Company and in an accident that took place on 23-09-1989, he suffered major injuries that resulted in amputation of his right leg below the knee. For the accident that had taken place on 23-09-1989, FIR was registered on 02.10.1989 and total compensation of Rs.33,045/- with interest @ 6% per annum was awarded by the Commissioner of Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Coimbatore Vide his impugned order dated 03-05-1993.

¶16

The only point canvassed before this Court on behalf of the appellant was that the Commissioner appeared to have acted solely on the pleadings of the claimant and did not advert to the evidence or more specifically the lack of it, and has ordered compensation without adequate proof.

¶17

On 16-11-2016, it was reported before this Court that the claimant Ranganathan had died even in 2007, and his legal representatives are yet to be brought on record. However, after hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and having arrived at the conclusion to be spelt out below, I decide to dispose of this appeal without in any way affecting the rights already

¶18

¶19

accrued to the claimant.

¶20

Admittedly, the accident had taken place on 23.09.1989, some 27 years from today. To entertain an argument such as the one advanced at this

¶21

distant point of time would be a travesty of justice more so when accident per-se is not disputed nor the contention of the claimant, now dead, that he was an employee at that relevant time.

¶22

The amount awarded is only Rs.33,045/- and it is stated to have been deposited. I do not find any merit in the appeal and hence the same is dismissed without costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. If the claimant/first respondent has not withdrawn the amount in deposit, his legal representatives are permitted to withdraw the same upon showing necessary materials to the satisfaction of the authority that they are the legal representatives of the deceased.

05.12.2016

To:

The Commissioner of Workmens Compensation Deputy Commissioner of Labour Coimbatore.

N. SESHASAYEE.J,

C.M.A.No.2723 of 2003 and Cross Appeal No.66 of 2009

¶31

05.12.2016 http://www.judis.nic.in

The New India Assurance Co.Ltd v. Thiru Ranganathan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The New India Assurance Co.Ltd v. Thiru Ranganathan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

United India Vs P. Kamaraj

M/S United India Assurance Co. Vs M/S the Arya Vaidhya Pharmacy

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Mathappan

New India Assurance Co.Ltd Vs Veerappan (Deceased)

The Managing Director Vs P.Dhakshinamoorthy

Sn Raj Vs Union of India