LAWS(KAR)-2016-10-123

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., IDIGA HOSTEL COMPLEX, BELLARY, BY ITS MOTOR THIRD PARTY CLAIMS HUB, II FLOOR, SRINATH COMPLEX, NEW COTTON MARKET, HUBLI Vs. R. PRAVEEN S/O RADASHEKARAPPA

Decided On October 04, 2016
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Idiga Hostel Complex, Bellary, By Its Motor Third Party Claims Hub, Ii Floor, Srinath Complex, New Cotton Market, Hubli Appellant
V/S
R. Praveen S/O Radashekarappa Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) New India Assurance Company Limited has filed this appeal challenging the judgment and order dated 30.11.2010 made in WCA/CR-483/2008 passed by the Labour Officer and Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Sub-Division-1, Bellary (hereinafter referred to as 'the WCC' for short) fastening the liability on them to compensate the claimant.

(2.) Respondent No. 1 herein filed a claim petition before the WCC contending that, he was working as a driver in a bus bearing Reg.No.KA-16/7933 belonging to respondent No. 2 herein. On 12.06.2008, as per the instruction of the owner of the vehicle, while he was proceeding towards Bellary near Obalapur cross, in order to give way to the oncoming lorry, he took the vehicle to the left side of the road, however, lost control over the vehicle and dashed against a road side tree and he sustained grievous injuries. Immediately after the accident, he was shifted to the Rampur Primary Health Centre ana took treatment therein. The police registered a case in Crime No. 42/2008. He contended that as on the date of accident, the claimant was aged about 24 years and working as a driver and that due to the injuries sustained in the accident, he could not do the work of a driver as he was doing earlier and hence, he sought for the compensation.

(3.) In response to the notice issued by the WCC, respondent No. 2-insurer entered appearance and 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 and sought for dismissal of the claim petition as against respondent No. 2-insurer.