SAKTHIVEL Vs. DURAIRAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE allegations found in the petition filed under Section 19(1) (a) of the Workmen Compensation Act 1923 are as follows:

(2.) THE averments contained in the Counter filed by the Opposite Parties 1 & 2 are as follows:THEse opposite parties do not admit the relationship between Senthil @ Senthilkumar with Sampath @ Sampathkumar. THE particulars as regards the age of the deceased, manner of accident and wages of the deceased are denied.

(3.) MR.N. Manoharan, learned counsel for the Appellants would submit that inasmuch as the Insurance Company could not be absolved from its liability to pay compensation to the claimants as per law, fastening liability on the first and second opposite parties alone is not at all sustainable. It is his further contention that in spite of allegations with respect to the violation of permit and policy conditions, the Insurance Company is in law bound to compensate the claimants.