THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BANGALORE Vs. TOPANNA DAKAPPA LAMANI ALIAS ARAKASALI, MAJOR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The National Insurance Company has filed this appeal challenging the legality and correctness of the judgment and order dated 21-8-2008 made in WCA/F-37/2007 passed by the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Haveri (hereinafter referred to as 'the WCC' for short) fastening the liability to compensate the claimants.

(2.) Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 herein filed claim petition contending that, Smt. Gouravva, wife of claimant No. 1 and mother of claimant Nos. 2 to 4 was working as a Hamali in a tractor and trailer bearing registration No. KA-27/T-723-724 belonging to respondent No. 5 herein. On 21-10-2003, while she was proceeding in the said tractor and trailer towards Chandapur to bring the fodder and manure, due to rash and negligent driving of the said tractor and trailer by its driver, the tractor and trailer turned turtle. Due to the said impact, Gouravva fell down and sustained fatal injuries. Immediately after the accident she was shifted to the Government Hospital, Shiggaon. But, she was declared as dead. Prior to the accident, she was hale and healthy. As on the date of the accident, she was aged about 35 years and getting salary of Rs. 4,000/- p.m. and Rs. 50/- per day as batta. The police registered a case in crime No. 172/2008 against the driver of the said tractor and trailer. The accident occurred during the course and out of employment. Since the insurance policy covered the risk of the tractor and trailer, both the owner and as well as the insurance company were liable to compensate the claimants. Hence, they filed the claim petition.

(3.) In response to the notice issued by the WCC, the owner of the tractor and trailer entered appearance and filed written statement admitting the fact that the deceased was working as a Hamali in the tractor and trailer and he was paying salary of Rs. 3,500/- p.m. As on the date of the accident, the driver of the offending vehicle having h Valid and effective driving licence and insurance policy covered the risk of the said tractor and trailer. Hence, the insurance company has to compensate the claimants and sought for dismissal of the claim petition as against the owner. Respondent-in-surer filed written statement denying the entire averments made in the claim petition and also disputed the relationship of master and servant between the claimant and owner of the vehicle. Further, the driver of the tractor and trailer was not having a valid and effective driving licence and the compensation claimed by the claimants was exorbitant and therefore, sought for dismissal of the claim petition.