NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. RAJA NAIKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether this appeal of the insurer filed under Section 30(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short 'the WC Act') against an award made by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, by which it is made liable to pay compensation for death or bodily injury of a person on the basis of Certificate of Insurance issued under sub-section (3) of Section 147 in Chapter XI of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the MV Act'), is maintainable if it is not founded on a ground by which an insurer was entitled to defend under sub-section (2) of Section 149 of the MV Act an action for compensation, being an important question arising for our consideration in deciding this appeal, we shall proceed to consider the same.

(2.) Appellant-insurer had issued the 'Certificate of Insurance' under sub-section(3) of Section 147 of the MV Act in favour of the second respondent-insured, the employer, covering his liability under the WC Act for death or bodily injury of his workman, the first respondent, who was the driver of a matador van bearing registration No, CTU 3000, a motor vehicle. That motor vehicle when was being driven on the National High Way No. 4 on 22-10-1989 by the first respondent, in the course of his employment under the second respondent, an accident occurred. As a result of that accident, the first respondent suffered severe bodily injuries affecting his right eye and causing fractures of his right hand just below the elbow joint and two ribs. Consequently, the first respondent claimed compensation for his bodily injuries, which totally impaired his ability to drive a motor vehicle, from his employer, the second respondent, and the insurer-appellant, which had issued a 'Certificate of Insurance' for the motor vehicle, by filing an application therefore under the WC Act before Ihe Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Tumkur (for short 'the Commissioner'). The Commissioner, who took into consideration bodily injuries suffered by the first respondent, which had disabled him from carrying on his driving occupation, by his award under appeal, held the second respondent to be liable for payment of amount of Rs. 89,730-00 as compensation under the WC Act and directed its payment together with interest at 6% per annum from the date of accident till its payment by the second respondent-employer and the appellant-insurer.

(3.) In this appeal of the insurer filed under Section 30(1) of the WC Act against the said award of the Commissioner, the amount of compensation awarded to the first respondent as computed under the provisions of the WC Act, is questioned as excessive, on grounds other than those by which it, as an insurer, would have been entitled to defend a claim for compensation under sub-section (2) of Section 149 of the MV Act It is how the question, which is formulated by us at the outset, has arisen for our consideration in deciding this appeal.