P RAJAN Vs. CHENNAI PETROLEUM CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The claimant in W.C. No. 273 of 2005 before the Deputy Commissioner-II under the Workmen's Compensation Act is the appellant in this appeal. At the time of admission of this appeal on 30.07.2009, the following substantial questions were framed for consideration in this appeal namely

(2.) The claim petition was filed by the applicant contending that on 20.05.2002, he joined the services with the first opposite party/first respondent herein through its contractors, the respondents 2 and 3 herein. According to the applicant, he was engaged as a fitter by the opposite parties/respondents 2 and 3 herein. While so, the next day of his engagement i.e., on 21.05.2002 at about 6.30 pm, he sustained injuries in an accident during the course of his employment. The injuries are in the nature of a crush injury on his left leg and a posterior fractured dislocated right hip. Immediately, the applicant was taken to the hospital run by the first respondent herein at Manali, where, after initial treatment, he was taken to Stanley Medical College and Hospital, Chennai. Thereafter, the applicant was taken to Apollo Hospital, Chennai where he was admitted for four days and during the course of his treatment, the applicant's left foot was amputated. Thereafter, the applicant was discharged from Apollo Hospital and again admitted in Indian Hospital, Arumbakkam, Chennai. Once again, the applicant underwent a surgery and his left leg was amputated from the ankle region in that hospital. The applicant's hip was also dislocated due to the accident and was operated upon at the Indian Hospital. The applicant was treated at Indian Hospital from 25.05.2002 till 05.08.2002, when he was discharged. The claimant's disability was assessed at 70% by the Doctor. According to the applicant, he sustained injuries during the course of his employment under the third respondent and the third respondent also insured the employees working under him with the fourth respondent, including the applicant. Therefore, the claimant filed the claim petition claiming Rs.4,47,400/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the accident.

(3.) The first opposite party as well as the third opposite party filed their counter statement before the Deputy Commissioner of Labour and opposed the claim petition on various grounds. On behalf of the insurance company/fourth respondent herein, it was specifically contended that they are liable for payment of compensation to the extent to which policy coverage is available to the workmen as per the premium amount paid by the third respondent and they are not liable for payment of compensation amount anything more than the coverage available under the policy.