UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., LTD Vs. RENUKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE case of the claimants is that the deceased Maha devi was working under the employment of Respondent No. 1 before the Commissioner in the Tractor bearing No. KA -29/T -1876 -1877 on monthly wages of Rs. 4,500/ - and daily bhatta of Rs. 30/ -. In the course of employment the vehicle met with an accident. The deceased sustained grievous head injuries and thereafter she died. The minor children filed a claim petition under section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act before the Commissioner. By the impugned order a sum of Rs. 2,36,472/ - was awarded along with interest. Questioning its liability to satisfy the award, the insurer has filed the present appeal.

(2.) THE following substantial question of arises for consideration.

(3.) I have examined the claim petition. Therein he has stated that the deceased was working as a coolie in the said vehicle. When the accident occurred. There is no reference as to what is the nature of work done by the deceased and as to whether the accident took place when such work was being done during the course of employment. Therefore, narrating the facts in the claim petition does not get infuse confidence that the accident took place during the course of employment. Further is an error committed by the Commissioner in holding the relationship of employer and employee between the deceased and the respondent No. 1. The grand father of the claimants has not led in any evidence to show that the deceased was under the employment of the employer There is no document with regard to payment of wages or even the supporting evidence of the employer. The employer has remained ex. parte. Therefore, solely based on the self serving statement of the witness it cannot be held that the deceased was the employee of the respondent No. 1. Under the circumstances the findings recorded is opposed to the records of the case. Consequently the substantial question of law is answered by holding that the claimants have failed to establish the relationship of employer and employee between the deceased and the respondent No. 1. The substantial question of law is accordingly answered. Consequently the appeal is allowed. The claim against the insurer is dismissed. The insurer is absolved of its liability to satisfy the award. Hence, the claimants are entitled to recover the said amount against the owner of the vehicle.