Civil Miscellaneous Appeal dismissed. Court held that the Appellant's challenge regarding the driver's lack of a valid batch has no merit as the Supreme Court has already settled the law that insurance liability is not exonerated by this factor.
The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal was dismissed and the award dated 12.03.2015 was confirmed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.02.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
C.M.A.No.2478 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015
M/s.United India Assurance Company Limited, No.66, Greams Road, Chennai- 600 006. ...Appellant Vs. 1.Thiru.T.Sampath 2.Tmt.S.Gowri 3.Tmt.S.Jameela ...Respondents Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 30 of the Employees Compensation Act, against the Final Award dated 12th March 2015 (received on 27.08.2015) passed by the Learned Deputy Commissioner of Labour – II, Chennai in W.C.No.167 of 2011. For Appellant :Mr.J.Michael Visuvasam For Respondent :Mr.Vijaya Rajan For Mr.K.Varadhakamaraj [For R1 & R2] R3 – No appearance J U D G M E N T
The only Substantial question of law raised in the present miscellaneous appeal is that the driver, who had driven the vehicle, which met with an accident was not holding a valid batch and therefore, the Insurance company is not liable.
2. The said issue has already been decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and not wearing a batch would not exonerate the Insurance company from liability.
3. In the present case, the factum regarding the accident was established. The claimants have further established that employer-employee relationship also existed. Under these circumstances, the Substantial Question of law raised by the
appellant deserves no merit consideration as the law had already been settled by the Apex Court in the matter of not possessing the valid batch at the time of accident by the driver.
4. Under these circumstances, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the findings of the Deputy Commissioner of Labour. Accordingly, the award dated 12.03.2015 passed in W.C.No.167 of 2011 stands confirmed and consequently, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in C.M.A.No.2478 of 2015 is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VIII)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
kak
To
The Deputy Commissioner of Labour – II,
Chennai.
+1cc to M/s.K.Varadha Kamaraj, Advocate Sr.6430
+1cc to M/s.J.Michael Visuvasam, Advocate Sr.6264
C.M.A.No.2478 of 2015
kv[co]
srg 26/02/2021
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Insurance company is liable when the driver did not hold a valid batch at the time of the accident.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Supreme Court of IndiaReferred¶8
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s.United India Assurance Company Limited
Tiru.T.Sampath
Tmt.S.Gowri
Tmt.S.Jameela
S.M.Subramaniam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
