Dismissed

Iffco-Tokio General Insurnace Co.Ltd., v. Smt. v.Narsavva and 2 Others

Telangana HC8 Sept 2023CMA/706/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held dismissal of an appeal against a workmen's compensation award. The insurance company filed C.M.A challenging an order granting compensation when its employee son died. The court dismissed the appeal primarily because the appellant failed to deposit compensation with interest as required by the Act.

What did the court decide?

Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 706 of 2015 is dismissed.

Iffco-Tokio General Insurnace Co.Ltd., Vs… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32s3 ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO

¶3

FRIDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINl

¶6

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PEAL NO: 706 OF 20't5

¶7

Appeal Under Section 30 Workmen's Compensation Acl, 1923, against the Order dated 09.03.20-10, in W.C^'l 1 1 of 2009, passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour- ll at Hyderabad.

¶8

Between:

¶9

IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURNACE CO.LTD.,, Rep. by its Manager, lTGl Strategic Business Unit, 2nd Floor, Uma Chambers, Banjarahills Road, ...APPELLANT Panjagutta,

¶10

AND

¶11

SMT. V.NARSAWA, W/o. yadaiah, Housewife, R|/o. Natove of Kolgur Village, Gajwel Mandal, Medak District, Presently R/o. Sanathnagar,

¶12

Kum. V.Shyamala,, D/o. Yadaiah R/o. Natove of Kolgur Village, Gajwel Mandal, Medak District, Presently R/o. Sanathnagar,

¶13

V.Yadaiah, S/o. Gangaram, R/o. Kolgur Village, Gajwel Mandal, Medak District. ...RESPONDENTS

¶14

l.A NO: 2 OF 201O(CMAMP. NO: 1307 OF 2010)

¶15

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased grant stay of all further proceedings in pursuance of the order dated O9.03.2010 passed in WC No.1 111 2009 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Asst. Commissioner of Labour-ll at Hyderabad.

¶16

l.A. NO: I OF 201S(CMAMP. NO: 1470 OF 2015)

¶17

Between:

¶18

Smt. V.NARSAWA, W/o. yadaiah, Housewife, Rlio. Native of Kolgur Village, Gajwel Mandal, Medak District, Presently Rl/o. Sanathnagar,

¶19

V.Shyamala, D/o. Yadaiah Rl/o. Native of Kolgur Village, Gajwel Mandal, Medak District' Presently R/o sanathnagarioNERS/t.r&zNRespoNDENts

¶20

AND

¶21

IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURNACE CO.LTD , Rep by its fVanager, lTGl Strategic Business Unit,2nd Floor, Uma Chambers, Banjarahills Road, ...1't RESPoNDENT/APPELLANT

¶22

Panjagutta

¶23

V.Yadaiah, S/o. Gangaram, R/o. Kolgur Village, Gajwel Mandal, Medak District.

¶24

(R-2 is not necessary party)

¶25

...3,d RESPONDENTS/APPELLANT

¶26

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim order dt.29.06.2010 granted in CMA MP No.1307/10 in CMA SR No.22906/201 0 and permit the^petitioners to withdraw the deposited compensation form the learned commissioner.

¶27

:SRl. T. MAHENDER RAO Counsel for the Appellant Counsel for the Respondents :SRl C. H. INDRASENA REDDY

¶28

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶29

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI CML MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No. 706 OF 2015 JUDGMENT:

¶30

Aggrieved bv the order datcd 09.03.2010 in W.C.Case No. 1 I 1 of 2OO9 passed bl thc Commissioner for Workmcn's Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour-ll, Hyderabad, thc opposite party No. 2/lnsurance Company has filed the prescnt appcal

¶31

For the sakc of convcnience, hereinafter, the parties wiil be referred as per their array before the Commissioncr.

¶32

The brief facts of thc case are that the applicants harre hled an application undcr the provisions of Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (amended as Employees' compensation Act) (for short 'the Act') claiming compensation of Rs.6,OO,000/for the death o[ one V.Ramulu, son oi applicant No. 1, brother of applicant No. 2 (hereinafLer referred as 'the deceased) in the accident that occurred on L2.0I .2OO9 , alleging that the deceased was employed by the opposite party No. 1 as driver on tractor and trailer bearing Nos. AP 23 G 6194 and AP 23 K 6463, which was insured nith opposite party No. 2. It is stated that on the fateful day, while the deceased was proceeding on the said tractor and trailcr alter ploughing the agricultural land

¶33

2 MGT',.J ( \1 \ ;r)6 2015

¶34

lrom Dilalptrr to Brjgama vlll:rge on thc insrructic,rr r,[ opposite party No. i and when the deceased tried to turn thr: s:rid Lractortorvarcls back on r-ralla cherurru, the said traclrrr accident.l-r, turned turtle, due to u,hich, t.he dcceascd fcll r-rndlr the engine of the tractor. As a result, the deceased :;ur.cul.nbr:d to [he injuries on the spot. Based on the complainL, tl-rc [)olice, Gajwel Police Station, registered a case in Crimc No. l2 of 20O9. According to the applicirnts, thc dcceased q,as 22 r r.ars old and earning Rs.4,000/- per rnon[h as a clriver under the employrrrent of opposite party No. 1 and usccl to contribute for the welfare ol the family. Duc to Lhe acciclcnt, thc.,r lost their source of income and love ar-rd affection. Hcrrce, thc applicants have filccl the application claiming compensatron of Rs.6,O0,ttOO/- against the opposite parry Nos. I ancl 2, who are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensatior.r.

¶35

Before the Commissioner. the opposrte pir rt), No.1, orvner/ employer, filed counter stating that the decr,:ased rvas employed under him as driver on the said tractor ancl aclmitted the fact that the deceased died while performing his cluties. He further stated that the tractor was insured rvith opprtsitc party No. 2 and prayed to dismiss the application against hirr_r. On the other hand, the opposite party No.2, appeltant herein, filed

¶36

¶37

M(i P.,l c\r \ 706 :r:) I l

¶38

counLer den-ying the avermcn[s ol the application such as employe e-e m ployer relalionship, serlan, agc ol the deceased and manncr of accrdent. lle furthcr corltendcd that unless and until it is proved that thc deccascd died during the course of his employment and having valid ar-rd clfcctive driving licence, the Insurancc Company is not li:rblc Lo p.r\ Lhe compensation. He laslly contended that claim is cxcessive and exorbitant and prayed to dismiss the application.

¶39

On behall of the applicanrs, AWs. I and 2 wcre examined and Exs.A.1 to A.9 u,erc marked, Ex.A. I is the certificd copy of FIR, Ex.A.2 is the ccrtified copy of complaint, Ex.A.3 is the certified copy of inquest report, Ex.A.4 is thc photostat copy of RC of the driver, Ex.A.S is rhe photostat copy of insurance policy, Ex.A.6 is the photostat copy ot RC of thc tractor, Ex.A.7 is the photostat copy of RC ol the trailcr bearing No. AP 23 K 6463, Ex.A.8 is the photosta[ copy of household card and Ex.a.9 is the photostat copy of voter identity card. On bchalf of opposite party No. l, RW. I was examined and Bx. R. 1, photostat copy of RC of the tracror and tlx.R.2 photostat copy of insurance policy, were marked. On behalf of oppositc party No.2, RW.2 was examined and Ex.B. t, certificd true copy oi insurance policy, was marked.

ffi

(l ,^,1 \ 7il, t.

(r TLrc flrlmrrtissioner^{lri'lcr consiciei i;i;; thtcr} 'iit'n('t'^t':' rccorci, both^{oral anci docutne trtal], !)) rlc'lcrmil'Lilrrl tlrc rvag':s oi'} ;kcc-zrscri i:s R:;3,8977' lr(:l-^{lrl')lrli.r,Lrr l''1lg'rl-vln1l tirr'[;rr:irll-} '.1.21.:\7' It-,r the agr: o[^{in]uredbe irrg} '22^{vt:ais, zrlong'} ""'ith^sti'ri'll-) artrl advoclltt:^{t'ec ol Rs. 1,3621 ,1-t15 il11121r'l':clc()lnpc)rIl'ati()rlof} Rs.4,32,7O1 I

¶44

1-;c: 7 . A'ggrrr:vcd by^{thccomircnsltlioriau'a; tl' c'l'r-1} " Clornmiss:iotler,^{thc opposite partyl'ic' 2/insura'nccL'()irll)en\ll;ls} {-rled the^{present appeal to set asi'lethe impugued ordcr'}

¶45

llc:arcl lror-h sides^{ntld peruse d t he rccoi'd}

¶46

Lczrrt'red Standing^{Counsel fort'he oppositc pa'rty} l,io.2 / Insura ncc^{Compatly contendedthat on thc datc oi LLtc} ar:cidcnt, th<: deccased^{was noL havirrg vaJid atrd cl'fccii'rcd'rving} licence. l]e lurther^{contendedthat thcrc \/zrs llo enlplrlvcc'} employcr relationship^{as the deceasedwas s'rn of op;'osite parly} No.¹

¶47

On the other^{hand, learncclcounsel for the applicants} sought to sustain^{the impugnedorder of the Commissioner} conLending that^{considering all aspectsir-rcludinglhc agcar-rcl} avocaLion oI^{the deceased, the Commissioncr hasawarded}

¶48

MCP.J C\1.\ ;0(r 201 5

¶49

)

¶50

rcasonable compensation and the same needs no intcrlerencc by th is Court

¶51

1 i. The applicant No. 1, mother of the dcceased, was examined as AW. 1, rvho has reiteratcd the averments of the applicalion in his chicl examination. AW. I also admiLtecl that the deceased was posscssing valid drivrng licence as on the date o[ the accident. AW. 2, in his chief examination, deposed that the dcceased was r.l,orking as driver on the said tractor. He lurthcr deposed that the dcceascd uscd [o work as drivcr on his cousin's tractor from December,2OOT lor six months and later as requested by the opposite party No. l, the deceased used to work as paid driver on the said tractor lrom August 20O8. Hc admitted that the deceased died on 12.01 .2OO9 whlle performing his duties as paid driver on the said tractor. Though AWs. 1 and 2 were cross examined at length nothing was elicitcd to discredit their statemcnts. On behalI of oppositc party No. 2, its assistant was examined as RW. 2. RW. 2 in his chief examination, deposed that the said tractor was insured vide policl' bearing No. 394 1 2127 covering rhe risk lrom 2I.07 .2OO8 Lo 2O.O7.2OO9. He further deposed that the deceased was not having valid and effective driving licence as on the date of accident.

I'I( JP. I

1.1 \ t li

l.l Itr a .juderlcrlt rcports.l^{iil tlris i-tltlrt rn NewIndia}

¶56

Assurance Company^{Linrited v. Srr,t. N'Anjilarnm:rand five}

¶57

othersl hcld^{as under:}

¶58

"li) A peru':rtl ol^LlLe rudgnent^irt 'Surlron^{ili'l-r//l's.il'sr'/i} sul'e). ii^{t.uoulA dtsr'Io-selhol !le Hort'!t[c!\pex Cottrlltel(l lt:ot lllc.} brcatl, r,I^pctltc4 tttrtr)lort^{eg.rlsqtlr.iifrt ritior'' oI tlrtt'r't ()t ttlt'ttt(1.} (1 2Or.tj i,r tu,srttl '(Xerl 2tlo clnrtttry licence ul'the tltttr' rrs (!']iri 'l or srrD scctro,r^{(2)(a)(iL)oJ section 149' lruue Io be prouedlo llttt'c} b(,,1 .ontfitilcd^{bU llie orsurcd} Jbr^{Quoidtttgliabilitll1)4 tlt( i]lsui' r} l|lcre al'senct',^{jak< ctr i.nuaLtd dtiulttll lk.ei.e ot dLstlttQhfi(:Litt't )l} tlLt' rit'tt cr for^{ilnt'Lrtg1atllle rc,leuot1t ttD1e,(Lrc tial tlt llL('ntsilit''} clele^ttcr,:.; nLto^{ablclo the insurero.gait:.sleitl'Ler th":t1 ;urcdor} .!)]P tltti,d prtrlres^{'L'o (1uoidlis liQbililll to@orils insurell!! i: irlstrrer /t ts} to 1trt,,' rhut ilrc^{inst!red luos glLiltlJ oI negLigettc'ottclfotle'l '<t} ,,^r',r,., ,r'Lrs,r,urL,le^{catc ut ln(' nLaltcroJ} fullillttlcl^{t11' cttttd'ltot)l} llt(,^{pt)it('!) regordvrq use oj uehrcles bg tlttLglicetseti clnu<'ror tt e} u,ho runs rrol dsquoLified^{to.)nt)eaL LIT? rcLeuatttittt'}

¶59

'l'lle t,surotrce c:ompLLnies Qre. ltolue'uet Lltlllt o t i':tt^'a orr'td llteLr thbtlillJ^{r usl lotottllJ c-^iabftsh lltcctttculal'le} cl<,lcnccls)^{r(usedot the s! d praceediLgsl'tttnusl Ql:;o t'stabl''l]} L;r. urlt^ott the^{parl of theou'trcr of the uehicie; the burd{tt} ')i^pt'")i utltt:rt:for tuould^bcotrthern. 'l'he aourl aatTnot laU (lolutT otL!) critena as to ltou Ll'e ttti(l Lrrtrtlett tttoukl be^{dischargotl, lrtasrrittchas lhc srtrrt.,tr"-rrr'ri} clt'pe'tr,l -^{rtpotr llrc|ocLsandcrcurnstonce of each atse'} Euen u)here the lrrclrrer^{ls ableLo proue brcocltott llle Pa </sup> of l|tc irtsured concerinq^{th"epotic!) condition regartlLnqholdrr4rf} a uolLtl ltcence^{bll tllednuer uhis qualiJicationto dnte dtutrtg.ile} r?lct\L,tl peiotl, llte^{iasurer u'ouldtLot be allouedto (tooid tts} lnbtlttll r<tu.tot^{ds Llsured urlless the sard breach or ltr<'ctclLes rttt} tlP cortrlitton^{ol rltiuing licence is/ areso} .ful7(TatneDlol^{as arcfortrtd} l<t I'atc contnluted^{to Lhecause of the Qccide-,t.'lhe Tnbuttolstrt} iltcrprattnq^{tlrc policy cottdiliorts tDouklappllJ Lle ntktof ntttttr} prtr1,c-,, i,,,r1 llte^conceptol fundanental^brettcil -Lo QLL' r' 'clefenc<:s auoiktbl<, to the tnsured under sectrcn I -'19e) oI Lhe A(i 1 4.^'!'he contention of^{Lhe ledtned counsel} Jb'^{Lheappella'Lt} tl1(lt tlu' soid Judgment^{6 notapplicdbletoLllc V/orl'n1etts} a:omp.rlsatiotl^{Acl is nor coraideredualLd- Thouqhitutas qt'c'n} ttnrlir lhe Motor^{VehiclesAct, ilis equallgapplu:ablcto tlle} Worktnen's Compansation^{Act- The lnsurer could ttol artoidhts} ItabtlLtlt loLua)tds^{the i$uredttrlesshe proue.sllTQt llt(' breach tt'(ts} so futi<lonetLttLl^{lo hQueconltlbutedlo llte cause rt[ lh'e accrl"'t'} 'llrc tk'cettsctl was nol driuing the uelltcle Ql IItt' tinre^{t)J ll'e} accldetl, btlt tuas^{crossingLhe road to attendthe trurc calll'rJ} sLopping his toftA. As sucl1.^{the policg cottditiotls regarding dauer} ,roi hoidrng driuttg licence at the^{time ofaccidett caftnolL'e} corrsnl<:recl es furidamental breach^{t!lothqd conlibuted to lhe} cause of the Qccrclcnt, so as^{to dischargethe appe'LLa nt} Jrorn^tt'e Lnbility.^'fhe ebpl4^{judgmentalsodisclosestl'Lat lhe abseic( nf} llrc dnuinq 1114n1p .:1nnot be a^{reason to denll lle competts'1ltor} u,hen thr:ile rLns tt Ltalid insuronce^{policg As.stzch,rl i's <r;n-srdcre''J} l/ral l/r. Cornrrissl oner had^{tlot comiiltedanu cnor lrl passlilglh9} oworcl lroldrrg the Opposite^Parties Jointlg^{andseue'rallyLiabLt'tt}}

¶60

'^{(lMA N.,,1?69 o1200,1 decided on 27.10.2021}

¶61

¶62

N,l(iP,J C) \ t-u6 l0 i 5

¶63

P(tA^{coDtpetsLttiotr} k) tlLe upplrcat s.^'l'he order o/' thc (irrarn r-s.s ioner LUas nol controrl) b laLL) or pralxtbtltties ol'tlte c-cts<, an(l tues ttol ltobLe to b? sel eslle lletrce, ldo trct rttd (ntlJ iterils uL tlle appeal aftd tllerelore, l/le sorle ts luble to be drcnussed "

¶64

In vieu, of the abovc judgment, this Court js of Lhe considcred opinion that merely not possessing valid ciriving licencc does not create any bar in coming to a conclusion to award compcnsation to the applicant as the Act is bcr-rcficial legislatron cnacted to protect [he intercst of employees.

¶65

With regard [o the employee-employcr relarionship be tu,een the deceased and the oppositc part_y No. 1, iearncd Standing Counsel for the Insurance Company contendcd that there is no employee-employer relationship between the deceased and opposite party No. 1. It is pertinent to statc that the opposite party No.1, employer, who is the ou,ner of the said tractor, was examincd as RW. I and he categorically dcposccl Lhat the deceased was working as paid driver under his employment on the said tractor. In cross-examination also he admitted that the deceased, who is happencd to be his son, working under his employment as paid driver. At this juncture, reliance is placed on the decision of the Apex Court in Smt.T.S.ShgtaJa v. Ortental Insurq.nce Compang and

¶66

il^(;P.,l \1 \ / 0b It.) i.;

¶67

An.otlter.. rlircrcin ir t para!1rilph N,)s.9 arl(l l0 it^it ils^hcldas

¶68

u it 11o r:

¶69

"o il,.^{(b,nrtr-ssiul.-r} Jcr^'",irtA rr^{L.;l 's} ii;rrpcnsajl]orr^{hat7, itt iiit} ttt::(' :il ltentl, ttpltro+:,etl tl:Lc eiaieti:e^{rtlclut:edt;clitrclunr o:d} rL torrlarl a Jirtrh:n1 oi facl tliot^{tl,rz dcceds((l ;uas ittdccdr:rnpknl'rl} as tt rl:tter lttl tlv^ctrLtttcr ttI^{thetei''.Liet1omQlit'r l/lcollr''r} lto!tpttttl t() ,1, /r,s brrtlhcr^{'!'ltctt indinSt couk)tolbe lL./lt'ltl} int,r,', ,t1 tt'tl)'^,'r ','r,e'rst^cl !)tl^{t11( llOL! ('oLtn ltt, tltlllt ("tl} 1111^tit.i,L'rl lltt ltit i lltol^{ll)e t, st)()ttd.ctlatt.ttK ]' ol titt' tr('i;tt-l(' lt 'l} altpati,trl ar.(^rr rt,/1,1.-t.s^{utt:-1 LiaLtri-t1 .slalleil tftalLl!a (k'(:east'Lt' t</sup> lu!; tia)tut(J.r brall'u. but^{rr.'asrr,orAing os a paid dr,v'ruttclerhi''t'} ? /r.^rlr7,r rrr,ss^ror rer lod, trt^{this regard,ttbserued:} 'Alier c)D.r"tnq thc pdg lsrlt ol Ll:!c,lndhrct tuoclcsh Hi1lL' l,!1,1 r.lktl tpo't L'g 2nd c]i)o'rct'-l^{tt,s srcnfi.]llhPall)n"t()f} I chtcl( b?ult ihg sc/e il llre.ss has^{ljcenu,L.Lc,__css,fuIlL} /,1,s/r',).r /,is..rs_e;)rrl l,^{t/ri-sp^rcer:i,/rngthe outk'roJ lh.} it lt.t\ tilt!na,cd li"lin. tb.is^('ou.t .Len Lhoilqil^lLe Ls⁽ⁱ : tt t I ii\t ::. t1..1::",1, ortl^lr.rs .ilrSrlirrcd 'n^hts ')t)ccnotL:; t t/.it^tL,-.f:t 4t et.4.I lli\ltlti t!tc d.o\ts(l uos LLs^t/)t1t190 'r.r^l. t,tit r|orArrto as a dnL.er uttler^{luttt, ottclltct!'} .|lt it(l ll{tt ttt LL,ds^{paAtltllsoLc;l} ll^{nhtm. fh"aPpltanlt1} ::itt\ '1 ol hrs cose^lms :;ubrnitted^{Ilott bleHigh Cou'1} Irtq,\ent^{tepo1ld trll-l? 2OO6KA.I? 5lB. 'l'teDtuisionc'i} llrntqer, lltnk'd India bsura'7ce^{a:oinpanll LLd-t/s.YeLlappa} tli ?t ilopDtl ALuqudL &, C,3. Irhiah I haL,e exan-.Lned ut depLh '-Litlti^{Llokls:,i.1rlher.'rs tfiLaLLLhat relatiues catuol bett1} ,), Dt,tlt.t I iip:(tre rekio|.hq). Tlrcre.torc t is t).o possible ta ,t ar, ti!,. ..r: tdl!1 ttaLrt:,' iatit^?:'i!i(ttcP n foF!)t^ofli'1. t;;;tlt.n, |tit4.t(het)'uett(ii \ to l)e ugled iL^jAt)d1t oi IL]. r,,,,i1rr,r^{rir,: tt;e} r"asoti. I hold^{thattlTe dece(ts('dtt\ts} 11.)"i.ttq l. dt.,cr under trsl oPpotPtlt^{ot1.) (lnL'utl ToyoLa} .Lr,'ls ,^/.) K.4-01 C 4:2-3, llttt he dred^it acctdent ott ,).1 ), )O()a, rhar he .s o 'u)o.kt.ao.n cs deined n the lk).-hlle,r'-s Crrru)e,$oridn Act atLd^{it $ heldtl,ol he los} .atlsed acci(lent n the course^{of emplogmenti^a llegligeit} f.tst1t.)l. u)Ltt(h^{11t:,s resulledtn h$ dealh'} I o Ti)- t)ttbt^t('os,'D tufucL'^{lle l{ighCo rt ltosgiuen to up-\el li} " altoL e ltrttlirtl^{of lltContnusstoneris lhal lheComnttssioner coti,;l} not blutdhl^{(rccel)tLlie oroleurdetLct: uithoul onalgstttll ll} 'l (lo.t,u"ttloru ct)ldcru:e ott rccord. We farl Lo apprecittlc^{o^sl.o LLrlitt} u,us Ih(' dL)c]l^{enklrlJ euidelrcetohiclLllrcllighCoLttlhdd} Ialed^t') apprcct()le. ottd L!')Lot^{u o.s tlLecontradlclion' iJ an!,betiueensIrcl1} ciocune,tts ar.d^{llrcuersiotlgiuen bl1 tle winessesexamuetl} bclore llrc Coatnti-s-sroner.^{Thetligh Caurl couldr.ol haue, witltoLtt} aduerlinq l.o llY^{doc.ttfiLl2ntsuoryel|refetredto by it ltoueupsL't} the/lt(trq oJ f..ct tl,hrh^{the Comrnissioneru,as enlilled to record-} SuJ.licc rt lo soll llQl aPart^{otttdpPrecialionof euttlerrceadrl'.ut''L} belare^{l ltc' (lo,,r,)t.sslorlert/re ttiqhCoutlh.dsrletther referredl.o ttL'l} cle:rernurrc'cL enrl^{quast\on of} ltttl'^{ttltrch le-ssa sub.sl(lnllalqL€'.slrr)'l} ctf lant, r'xistt'rtct'u)llereoI u\ts u condliotl^pteccdenl .far^l]*' nlotlttortobitllt of rury appeal under Seclic,l^{3O. lno.srauchn-s 1/tt'} Il(jlr court rerrtttutt'cl obliulous of lle ltosic^{requirenrcntof Lau'} lor tLrc n(lttt otLabiliill of on oppeal beJore it and^{inasmuchas )l} treoied lhe appeol to be one on facls it committed at7 enor^ruhi',' needs to be coffecled."}

¶70

-,\11t^{20 I4 SuprcnteCottn89-i}

¶71

MGP,J c\1.\ 706 201 :,

¶72

¶73

¶74

A plain rcading of prir-rciple laid clown in Lhc above said citation clearly indicates that merely the deceascd being employed as workmen/driver under the employment of opposite parl] No. I, or.vner/ employer, who is happcned to be thc fathcr of tlrc deccascd, the Insurancc Company $,as not bound [o makc contcn tion that there is no employee emplol,er relationship bctween the deceased and opposite partv No. j. The said conrention of the oppositc part1, No.2/lnslrrance Company is nor based on a question of lau, but it is purely a ques[ion of fact, which cannot be raised before this Court as per Section 30 ol the Workmen's Compensation Act. Hence, the above said contention ol the learncd Standing Counscl lor the opposite party No.2/lnsurance Company is unsustainablc.

¶75

Under these circumstances, this Court is of the considcred opinion that the Commissioner, after considcring all thc aspccts, has rightly came to the conclusion in au,arding compensation to the applicants. Thus, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the findings of the Commissioner.

¶76

At this Juncture, learned counscl for the applicant raised an objcction about rhe maintainability of the appeal itself. He further contendcd that according to the proviso Scction 30( 1) ol trmployees' Compensation Act, 1923 no appeal by an employer

¶77

tir

¶78

i\1(,r' : i !i^:.-lri-) -lrr

¶79

rrndet clatisc^{(lr) sh:rll lie unlcssr"he lnerloran<.1unloi appcal} ar:cornpa rtt,:ri^{['.'2 1'1 1-iifit:atr'lrv ihe C'otnntil;sLotlr:r} ih c efft:c^I tha'.^'.hc :tppr:llatt-tt^{ir;rs clc-lrrsitcci} "'^{iti-r l-rirnlirc} arnourlI llaYabL u nder Ordcr

¶80

Accortlirlg^{rc Scctionll(-) ol tr;ni]1,)i'ees'( oln1.rc:I:;,tLi<.ltt5'r t'} 192-l lhcrrr^ts a l.rai^rr I'^{rcgistr';ltton} ol appeal^{in caser;'i [:rilurcl{} aJrncila trt.s^ft:r rlt:l.lositing^{:rmoLl11ior'lcrcd' iicr cc''nvrtricIlt sel(L'} Sr:t:tion 30^of Ilrrrplo-r'ee s^{Cotlr pct-rsal'iotr Act,1 9211 irj extractco}

¶81

[rc:reund cr:

¶82

-re.lt,,it^{,lortl' L-tttl otr:cs'( i'tlperi'soliorlAcI' Iq'l'} '\ppeals ,lt^{1 ttl,t,. tt,,,,,ti1,, tc} '1.,.^{!li,l'tLt'tfl Fr ct,nihc foliou't"} ,,,,t, '^. i^, '^{'"''r,\sro,i,r't tnt llJ.lai 4t' ord?r '1tu"4ttr'tt"l} It't i..t^'tt ,' t lttt'111 'tt"t:tlt th('t l't' tay "J^{r'ttc'|ttDttt.)'t t)l /'} h(ll:ttat :.ltltl PxtlnLeil^{ot' o:tt('t1urs('or rlsalloutt;tg a clcirtrrt} J,,,j ,,, r,r,,,,.^{-r ,t t,tmt' .t,,,t. t,tu),)'tor,lt r ott\trdttttlitrtpr"} ',,, :,.,,,,t1,. . .',^{i {..t,,,/} '' (ll 'tt'^{n'L r tt.ItttrtQ to olL'tt} ,", ,,1 ,r",, 't ,t tt,tllu',,'^{r!'l1t uaAnt.'1t i') at: otJ'\ f'1t illrt,} o^.' ,L:r',t.,^{,,'' i1 ,"";} 't\ttttott^{n!4o"'!tlPtlal)cttddttls} "' 1, ,f. -.,,',,1 ',:'lotler'-'.^{nt tit''illott't't'l} 'tttrJ^|L't'tt 'r/^{(t p.,rs"r'} ili",/,r(i^{1,,,,,-ro4iu ir'si,ch,1q'ertdartt;(d) atl otde' allortttng} .o' ),tiiioi,'i,,q^o,,,tc!.aLn, [o''^{thc c.mottnl o]'Qnoldettnila uttd,''} ,,,' ,l"r,,,.-rli.^{,tl :;ub:;r:ctrttt(2) clsect'rlr 12,;or (el otl o.rCc'} r, lu-ttt.l^t't ',\1;slPr^t; tttt tt@rtt'^(1:tt't of^{nq'i ctrtcr't} " ,,,u:rcrt,t,t lllt \rtttt?^{,,tp'r-t't'lrrtrllot lltt togtsltottoi ol tll} ,,t,,,,,', r" ,-"rr,lrt,,'i ltortul"l t!^{tt1 lto opl"-alsholl1r} ',r,", ttt^is! a,,tt^{rrl,'r uricss tt \ubsttttUttl questt'tt oJ laut t</sup> ,i,,,t, .a^{,,, it,'t)ppeal.ttntittt lhttttsrof on otti"t othcr tlntt} or), orrl., -sLrch^{a-s is re|zned to Ln.ktuse (bl, :l.L|ess Lhe} orrr,rr,,^{,r, (ltsPute 01 lhe apl'e(ll is not less thanr**Iett} ijt,, r.t",,,1^{n4r""t o,strchltigle'r an('untas the Centn} Cur",n,,,r',rt^{ntrty, bg notifrcationnthe OfficiolAazetta'} sptcrl'y .^f'ro|dcrt fuiller^{lha| no ol4teal shall he it.ong.cost.} ,i, ,ui'rct,^,t,r, lxti.res^{ltaL)e(tllrced l'o abidc:} -bg th-c deckiort tt!' ttt t'ottlt^{to 1)</sup> lha'Po'uPi' Pro'/l' Ll .Ir,'' t-tl, rI!a \tt, aqf.(''t ,u,,1, -,',t,n, ,r,,,pp"ertl l't1 {ttt crryi"U'r'tttder^{elous" (o) sl'rtll} Jrc rrrrl, ss^{th, ,tt"tn(ot\r)tttn ol ot'pPol ts octotttpdtlteclDU} 't .r tltct)tt b,t^{tlt,'Cdntttt:,'ottrlo tlr r'fi"'ltha:thpuppcllo:t'} nlot'a"po.iiect^{toithhurl11rr'1177v6utrlparloble under lhe ord't.} tt14,"rrtr*t^{rtgauLsl. (2) Thepenodof Lirutatictrl forarLapp<ttl.} urvler this^"scction shall^{be sitlq dags'13) Theprouisionsol} s.r1rr)rl 5 af ilt.^{Littlitlltotrq.1'la6J} l.16^{oflq63)l' sho1 bc} opltltcoltlt' ta al)PeQ[s^{u,ld(r lhr-s s(:11ro't}}}

¶83

4*A/

¶84

¶85

l{(iP,l CII,\ 706 20 ] J

¶86

¶87

ln vieu o[ provrso referred above, no appeal shall lie in case of lailure of thc amount payable under Order by the aggricvcd partv. The rccord shows that the appcllant/ lnsurance Comparry lailcd to deposit the compensation amount with inLerest within the stipulated time, thereby the appeal shall not be registered as such the Civil Miscellaneous Appeat also liable to be cltsmisscd on thc said ground.

¶88