LAWS(MAD)-2003-4-48

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. SRINIVASA GOODS TRANSPORT

Decided On April 17, 2003
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. Appellant
V/S
SRINIVASA GOODS TRANSPORT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NATIONAL Insurance Company Limited, Madras-1, aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation-No. 1, Madras-6 dated 16. 11. 1994, made in W. C. No. 87 of 1993, has preferred the above appeal.

(2.) THE first respondent herein/applicant made a claim under the Workmen's Compensation Act in respect of death of her brother by name Mani alias Mahesh in a road accident on 29. 8. 90 in the course of his employment. According to her, her deceased brother Mani alias Mahesh was working as a cleaner under Messrs. Srinivasa Goods Transport, Madras-79, 2nd respondent herein on a daily wage of Rs. 40 and batta of Rs. 10. On 29. 8. 90 while the deceased employee was travelling as a cleaner in lorry TSC 1611, he met with an accident at Garay village, Boed District, Maharashtra State and died at the spot. As the death occurred out of and in the course of his employment, the owner of the vehicle, 2nd respondent herein and in the insurer, namely, appellant herein were liable to pay compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act. Before the Commissioner, the owner of the goods transport did not file a counter affidavit and only the insurance company filed a counter opposing the claim of the applicant. The Commissioner, on consideration of the materials placed, and after holding that the deceased employee died on 29. 8. 90 in an accident in the course of his employment, and the applicant being his dependent, and in the light of existence of valid policy, passed an order directing the insurance company/appellant to pay Rs. 58,151. 80 to the applicant within 30 days from the date of receipt of the said order. Questioning the said order, the National Insurance Company has preferred the present appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act.

(3.) HEARD Mr. R. Sivakumar, learned counsel for appellant. Though notice was served on the contesting first respondent, she has not chosen to contest the appeal by engaging a counsel.