ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. DULY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER Vs. JAYAMMA, KUPPE GOWDA AND SOMASHEKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Insurer is in appeal calling in question order and award passed by Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Sub -Division -2, Mandya in WCA/FC/CR -27/2007 dated 20.06.2008 whereunder claim petition filed by legal heirs of deceased workman under section 10 of Workmen's Compensation Act came to be to allowed in part and a compensation of Rs. 3,67,360/ - has been awarded by fastening the liability jointly and severally on the owner and insurer and directing the insurer to indemnify the claim. Learned advocates appearing for the parties would fairly submit that appeal had been admitted on 29.11.2012 and by oversight substantial question of law has not been formulated and as such they submitted that substantial question of law may be framed.

(2.) HAVING heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and on perusal of the order and award in question as well as records secured from the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Mandya, I am of the view that following substantial question of law would arise for my consideration: Whether Commissioner was justified in directing the insurer to indemnify the insured in respect of a claim arising on account of death of workman due to injuries sustained in the road traffic accident while travelling in the tractor by sitting on the mudguard?

(3.) PER contra, Sri. B.M. Shyam Prasad, learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2 would support the order and award in question and would contend the insurer be directed to pay the amount and to recover the same from third respondent -owner of the offending vehicle. RE: SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW: