NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. MARIAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred by the Insurance Company being aggrieved by the award passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Tirunelveli, in W.C.No.28 of 2004, dtd. 20/4/2006, directing the appellant/ Insurance Company to pay compensation of Rs.1,75,426.00 with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of payment.

(2.) The brief facts leading to the appeal is that on 17/3/2003 at about 10.30 a.m., one Avudayappan died in the accident occurred during digging hole in the Well using Compressor fitted with the Tractor bearing Registration No.TN-27-Y-6507. The said Tractor, in which, the Compressor alleged to have been fitted was owned by one Madasamy @ Pichai/seventh respondent herein and the same was insured under the New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Kovilpatti, who is the appellant herein. Initially, the claim petition was filed against the owner of the vehicle alone, seeking compensation of Rs.2,88,210.00 under the Workmen Compensation Act on the premise that the deceased is a workman under Madasamy @ Pichai, the owner of the motor vehicle and he died in the course of employment, age of the deceased was 37 years and his notional income Rs.3,000.00 per month. Applying factor 192.14 as per the Minimum Wages Act, he is entitled for Rs.2,88,210.00.

(3.) The appellant, who was impleaded subsequently as second opposite party, filed counter denying the involvement of Tractor in the alleged accident. Referring the F.I.R., Final Report, Observation Mahazar, Rough Sketch and the previous statement of the witnesses recorded under Sec. 161 of Cr.P.C., it was contended that nowhere it is whispered that the accident occurred due to the Compressor fitted in the Tractor, which was insured under the second opposite party/the appellant herein. It was further contended by the appellant that contrary to the content of the F.I.R., after one year, the Claim Petition has been filed with fabricated facts as if the Compressor fitted in the Tractor went on causing the accident. Whereas the true fact as found in the F.I.R. is that the Battery fixed with the Detonator was wrongly ignited by Madasamy @ Pichai, the first opposite party. There was no reference about the Tractor or Compressor fitted to the Tractor in the F.I.R. While so, on ill-advise and to get rid of prosecution for using the Detonator illegally, Madasamy @ Pichai has come forward to fabricate the theory of motor accident by taking advantage of his Tractor bearing Registration No.TN-27-Y-6507 insured under the appellant Insurance Company has been fitted with Compressor and it went on wrongly causing the death of Avudayappan.