Partly allowed

M/S.Shriram G.I.Co.Ltd. v. Pravat Ch.Acharya

Orissa HC13 Oct 2017FAO/240/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal filed by an insurance company challenging an Employees Compensation Commissioner's award of Rs.4,67,477 to a truck driver injured in an employment accident. The court modified the award to Rs.2,80,000 due to errors in assessing loss of earning capacity and monthly wages, eliminating interest on the balance.

What did the court decide?

Original award of Rs. 4,67,477 modified to Rs. 2,80,000. Interest removed on the modified amount. Balance refunded to the Insurance Company.

This appeal by the appellant-Insurance Company is directed against the judgment/award dated 09.5.2017, passed by the Commissioner for Employees Compensation, Cuttack, in E.C. Case No.49-D of 2013, awarding an amount of Rs.4,67,477/- as compensation along with interest @12% per annum from the date of accident i.e. 23.12.2012, till deposit.

Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company submits that as the injured claima nt has renewed his driving licence after the alleged accident, by declaring himself physically fit before the concerned licence granting authority, the Commissioner was not justified in as sessing the loss of earning capacity of the injured claimant to the extent of 70%. It is furt her submitted that as there was no clear, cogent and credible evidence to show that the injure d claimant was earning Rs.8,000/- per month as wages, as a driver in the Truck no.OR-04-E/3744 , the Commissioner erred in accepting the same and assessing the compensation amount on that b asis. It is accordingly submitted that the assessment of the compensation amount is not proper and justified and the award is highly excessive.

Learned counsel for the claimant-respondent no.1 while supporting the impugned award s ubmits that the same having been passed on appreciation of the evidence available on record, n o interference is warranted.

On a perusal of the impugned award, it is seen that pursuant to notice, the owner of t he Truck no.OR-04-E/3744 appeared before the Commissioner and filed his written statement admi tting the employment of the injured claimant as a driver in the vehicle, accident which took p lace on 23.12.2012 and the injuries sustained by the claimant in such accident. The owner fur ther admitted that he was paying Rs.8,000/- per month as wages to the claimant, as a driver in the Truck. Considering the materials available on record, both oral and documentary, includi ng the police papers such as, F.I.R. (Ext.1), Final Form (Ext.2), Injury Report (Ext.5) and th e original Out door ticket (Ext.6) and the admission of the owner of the vehicle, the Commissi oner has come to hold that the injured claimant was working as a driver in the Truck no.OR-04- E/3744 and sustained injuries in an accident on 23.12.2012, which arose out of and in course o f his employment, which cannot be faulted.

Coming to the plea that the claimant had renewed his driving licence, declaring himsel f physically fit before the concerned licence granting authority on 18.9.2014, much after the alleged accident, the Commissioner on perusal of the case record, found that at the time of re newal of the driving licence the medical form submitted by the applicant-claimant is not avail able in the office of RTO, Cuttack and in absence of such medical form, the plea raised by the Insurance Company that the applicant has no physical disability as he has renewed his driving licence by giving a physical fitness certificate can not be accepted. In absence of any cont rary evidence, the Commissioner relying upon the evidence adduced by the treating doctor (P.W. 2), has assesed the loss of earning capacity of the injured claimant at 70%, as a driver in th e truck.

Considering the submissions made and keeping in view the quantum of compensation amoun t awarded and the basis on which the same has been arrived at, I feel, the interest of justice would be best served, if the awarded compensation amount of Rs.4,67,477/- is modified and red uced to Rs.2,80,000/- which is payable to the claimant, on which no interest is payable. The i mpugned award is modified to the said extent.

The Commissioner for Employees Compensation, Cuttack, is directed to disburse the modi fied compensation amount of Rs.2,80,000/- along with the accrued interest thereon to the claim ant on proper identification. The balance amount along with the accrued interest thereon shall be refunded to the appellant-Insurance Company.

M/S.Shriram G.I.Co.Ltd. v. Pravat Ch.Acharya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Shriram G.I.Co.Ltd. v. Pravat Ch.Acharya

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

Parsuram Naik Vs Hari Pr.Sharma

Divisional Manager,Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Sita Chatar

Manager,M/S.New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs Nabaghan Biswal

Union of India Vs Jasobanti Suna

Pravakar Rout Vs Pratap Ch.Das

M/S.New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Vs Pramod Guin