UNITED INDIA INSURANCE Vs. N. GANGADHARAN NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises from the order of the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Kozhikode, in Workmen's Compensation Case No. 11 of 1978. The applicant before the Commissioner was an employee under the first respondent. While he was employed as Driver in stage carriage bearing registration No. KLD 9329 on 24-11-1976, the vehicle met with an accident resulting in a fracture of both bones of his right leg. He claimed compensation of a sum of Rs. 32,340/- on the basis of his monthly wages, which were Rs. 775/-. The present appellant, the insurer and also the employer, were respondents before the Commissioner. The only points raised by them before the Commissioner were that, (1) "Whether the accident occurred due to the negligence of the applicant" and (2) "what shall be the quantum of compensation payable to him, if the first point is answered in his favour". No point of jurisdiction was raised by either of them before the Commissioner. The Commissioner held that there was no negligence on the part of the applicant. The quantum of compensation was fixed as Rs. 29,400/- as the amount of wages due to the applicant was found to be Rs. 450/- and the permanent disability and loss of earning capacity was estimated at 25%. The Commissioner found the insurer liable to pay the compensation since the employer-insured was entitled to be indemnified. It is against that order that the present appeal is filed.

(2.) SHRI S. Parameswaran, counsel for the appellant, urged that the Deputy Commissioner had no jurisdiction to pass an award against the insurance company in view of Section 14 of the Workmen's Compensation Act. He also submitted that the finding of the Commissioner, that the accident was not due to the negligence of the applicant, the assessment of the amount of monthly wages and the quantification of compensation, were all unsustainable.

(3.) THE only objection which seems to have been urged by the employer before the Commissioner was that the vehicle was insured and therefore the insurer was liable to compensate the applicant. The insurer stated that it was not liable to make any payment in respect of mechanical break-down, and that in any case, the accident did not occur in the course of the applicant's employment and therefore there was no liability for the insurer to pay any compensation. No point of jurisdiction seems to have been urged before the Commissioner. The insurer had participated in the proceedings before the Commissioner without raising any objection to jurisdiction.