NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. MURALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M.F.A. (WCC) No. 197 of 2006 is an appeal filed by the insurer/2nd opposite party disputing the correctness of the order passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Thrissur in W.C.C. No. 208 of 1997 in favour of the employee/1st respondent. The challenge is against the nature and extent of liability of the insurer. M.F.A. No. 1 of 2007 is filed by the employer/1st opposite party disputing the correctness of the award to the extent which is against him. Parties are hereinafter referred to as insurer, employer and employee respectively. Brief facts relevant for the decision of the appeals are as follows: Employee was working as a toddy tapper. On 25.09.1995, at about 5.30 p.m. he fell down from a coconut tree and the accident occurred in the course of his employment He was working for the employer. According to the employee, he sustained commuted fracture of right hip, dislocation of right elbow with fracture head of radius, fracture of metacarpal bones of right hand, bilateral calcanical fracture and dislocation of bones of right hand. Contention raised by the employee is that on account of the injuries, he sustained permanent partial disability, seriously affecting his earning power. Hence he claimed compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- from the employer and the insurer.

(2.) Employer admitted that the employee was in his service at the time of accident. Contention of the employee that he sustained injury in the course of employment is denied by the employer. Employer disputed the quantum of claim and the liability to pay compensation. Further, he contended that if at all the employee is eligible for any compensation, it shall be paid by the insurer as there was a contract of insurance subsisting at the material time between the employer and the insurer.

(3.) Insurer opposed the claim of the employee by raising the following contentions: Insurer has no liability under the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 (in short, "Act of 1923"). The insurance company has not issued a policy covering such a liability of the employer. Employer has taken a Persona] Accident Insurance Policy (Group). By the terms of that policy, the insurer has no liability at all to pay compensation under the Act of 1923. The terms and conditions in the Personal Accident Insurance Policy (Group) will make it clear that only an ascertained sum need to be paid by the insurance company and the insurance company has no liability to pay interest.