LEELA Vs. M.K.SUKUMARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Sec. 30 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923. The appellants assail the order of Employees Compensation Commissioner (Industrial Tribunal), Thissur in E.C.C No.405 of 2016 (WCC No.196 of 2007).

(2.) The appellants are the widow and daughter of Sri.Vasu who died on 1/2/2006 following an accident. He was driving taxi car bearing Registration No.KEH 9783 along the Swaraj Round, Thrissur on the said date. At about 12.15 p.m he felt chest pain and collapsed resulting in the car dashing against an electric post. He was rushed to the Aswini hospital, Thissur, but he succumbed to the injuries. The doctor who examined him informed that Sri.Vasu died due to heart attack. The appellants filed a claim petition before the Employees Compensation Commissioner under the Employees Compensation Act claiming compensation from the 1st respondent, who is the owner of the vehicle and the 2nd respondent, the insurer. The 1st respondent did not chose to contest the matter. The 2nd respondent resisted the claim on several grounds. It was admitted that the vehicle was insured. But it was contended that the 1st respondent was not the owner having transferred the vehicle in favour of Sri.Vasu as early as on 17/3/2004. The further contention of the 2nd respondent was that the death was due to heart attack and not on account of an accident arising out of and in the course of the employment.

(3.) The appellants tendered oral evidence and documentary evidence. AWs 1 and 2 were examined and Exts. A1 to A5 were produced. The 2nd respondent produced Ext.M1, which is the insurance policy in relation to the vehicle involved in the incident. The learned Commissioner raised following issues;