LAWS(KAR)-2019-6-44

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. LALITHA BAI

Decided On June 28, 2019
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Appellant
V/S
LALITHA BAI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Insurer New India Assurance Company Limited being aggrieved by the Judgment and Award dated 06.04.2017 passed in E.C.A.No.59 of 2014 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C. Cum Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Hosapete (for short the 'Commissioner') has filed this appeal.

(2.) It is the case of the claimants before the Commissioner that the petitioner No.1 is the legally wedded wife of deceased-Rama Rao Naik and petitioner Nos.2 to 5 are their children. Deceased-Rama Rao Naik was working as labour under the employment of the 2nd respondent. On the instructions of 1st respondent on 23.07.2010 at about 5.15 p.m. the deceased was working as labour and attending the plastering work at Block No.4, Room No.4 situated in Labour Colony in the premises of the 3rd respondent, at that time the other labour K.C.Ramesh Naik, who was working along with the deceased-Rama Rao Naik, went away from the room to take tea. In the mean time, all of a sudden, due to rain fall, water came inside the room from the door as well as from the walls, resulting the ground earth and deceased fell down on the ground due to electrocution. Immediately, after the incident the deceased was shifted to Sanjeevani Hospital, Vijay Vittal Nagar for treatment, but the doctor who examined the deceased declared about his death. Thus, the incident happened while the deceased was working as per the instructions of 1st respondent under the employment of the 2nd respondent in the premises of the 3rd respondent. As such, there is a jural relationship between the deceased and respondent Nos.1 to 3 and the respondent No.4 is the insurer.

(3.) At the time of death the deceased was aged about 40 years and he was hale and healthy and was earning Rs.300.00 per day. Due to sudden death of the deceased petitioners have suffered with great mental shock, pain and agony, therefore, they filed their claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000.00 against respondent Nos.1 to 4.