LAWS(MAD)-2011-6-303

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. PANDIAMMAL

Decided On June 29, 2011
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Appellant
V/S
PANDIAMMAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is filed by the Insure F against the award of compensation by the Deputy Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Madurai, in favour of the first respondent/claimant and it is directed against payment of the award amount to the claimant by the insurer. This appeal is admitted on the following substantial question of law;

(2.) The facts which led to the filing of the appeal are as follows:- one Chandran @ Chandrasekaran was employed as driver in the lorry bearing Registration No. TN-28-2584 originally under the first respondent Vellaisamy and thereafter, the third respondent Sivasithan, After the vehicle is transferred by Vellaisamy on 24.6.2004, the Registration certificate is admittedly transferred in the name of the third respondent Sivasithan with effect from 19.7.2004. While so, on 22.8.2004 the lorry was driven from Thanjavur to Madurai and the lorry capsized near Chinnaiya chattram resulting in the death of Chinnaiya @ Chandrasekaran and the same gave rise to the claim petition by his wife Chinnammal against the past and present owners of the vehicles/employer of the deceased and the insurer of the vehicle in question on the ground that her husband died due to accident occurred in the course of and out of his employment.

(3.) The claim petition, which was originally filed against only the past owner and the insurer arrayed as the respondents 1 & 2, was after due contest, dismissed by the learned Com-missioner, Workmen's Compensation on the ground that the claimant failed to prove the employment of the deceased in the vehicle in question. Aggrieved against the same, the claimant filed appeal before the High Court and the High Court remanded the matter for fresh disposal after giving due opportunity to the claimant to prove the actual vehicle involved in the accident and also the employer of the deceased on the date of the accident. Thereafter, the subsequent purchaser was impleaded as third respondent and the claim petition was retried.